# J.C. Bass v. United States Department of Agriculture

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · August 6, 1984 · 737 F.2d 1408

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9472336

## Case

- **Full name:** J.C. BASS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** August 6, 1984
- **Citations:** 737 F.2d 1408; 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 19802
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Garwood
- **Judges:** Garwood, Thornberry, Williams
- **Cited by:** 34 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9472336

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting the established rule in civil cases "that formal objection is not necessary if the trial judge was fairly apprised of the nature of the objection"

## Opinion text

GARWOOD, Circuit Judge,
Concurring:
I concur generally in Judge Williams’ cogent opinion. I add these remarks only to state my understanding that we merely assume that, but do not determine whether, Bass’ allegations sufficed to state a claim under the theory of Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 , 91 S.Ct. 1999 , 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), on which he sought to ground his suit. The only constitutional rights, procedural or substantive, claimed by Bass are those under the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. Equal protection, First Amendment and other constitutional claims are not presented. Bass’ due process claim rests on the assertion of a property interest, and it appears that no liberty interest is implicated. Considering our decision in McCachren v. United States Department of Agriculture, 599 F.2d 655 (5th Cir.1979), the nature of the federal programs involved and the substantial discretion committed to those administering them, there is certainly a serious question whether Bass alleged any character of property interest. However, McCachren was not cited by either party to the court below, or to us, and counsel for the defendants informed us at oral argument that he was unaware of it. Accordingly, and in light of our affirmance, it is not inappropriate to pretermit consideration of this aspect of the case.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9472336. Public record. Not legal advice.