Case law

United States v. Brett Allen Bursey

515 F.2d 1228 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 18, 1975

We turn first to the question of sovereign immunity. I. … to commit themselves as sureties for their son on the full amount of the bond under § 3146(a)(4) in order to secure his release, however, they would have become parties below by operation of F.R.Crim.P. 46(e)(3), 18 and clearly

Doe Ex Rel. Magee v. Covington County School District

675 F.3d 849 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 23, 2012

Qualified Immunity The district court held in the alternative that, even if the Does had stated a constitutional claim, the Education Defendants sued in their individual capacities were entitled to qualified immunity, because … any right to governmental protection based upon a special relationship between Jane and her school was not clearly established at the time that Jane was victimized.

Mary Walker v. Institutional Div of TDCJ

515 F. App'x 334 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 4, 2013

III The doctrine of qualified immunity grants “government officials performing discretionary functions” a shield from liability for civil damages as long “as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”9 “The first step in the qualified immunity analysis is to determine whether the plaintiff has alleged the violation of a clearly established federal

United States v. Kenneth Wayne Fricke

684 F.2d 1126 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 25, 1982

Before beginning the analysis, we note that here the instruction is somewhat qualified. … However, these ameliorative portions of the charge, and the qualified nature of the questioned instruction, are relevant, along with the other circumstances of the case, to our assessment of whether the error was clearly

Resa Latiolais v. Bradley Griffith

484 F. App'x 983 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 8, 2012

matter of law, be objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” … When a defendant moves for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity, the court must decide: 1) Whether the facts made out a violation of a constitutional right; and 2) whether that right was “clearly established

City of Hearne, Texas v. Milton Johnson

929 F.3d 298 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 8, 2019

SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from the denial of qualified immunity to a city attorney in a Section 1983 suit. We conclude the plaintiff does not have standing to pursue the claim in federal court. … Russ moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, but the motion was denied. He appealed.

Smith v. Texas Children's Hospital

172 F.3d 923 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 4, 1999

(“ERISA”), completely preempted all of her claims.2 Texas Children’s moved for summary judgment, arguing that ERISA preempted all of Smith’s state law claims because they “relate[d] to” a qualified employee benefit plan … Ed. 2d 542 (1976), the Supreme Court explained that it is an established rule that “[§ 1447(d)] prohibits review of all remand orders issued pursuant to § 1447(c) whether erroneous or not.”

Jose Gracia, and Healthsouth Rehabilitation Center, Intervenor-Appellant, Cross-Appellee v. Brownsville Housing

105 F.3d 1053 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 14, 1997

Instead, we should hold simply that the Gracias failed to establish a prima facie case under § 1983 because under Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 , 109 S.Ct. 1197 , 103 L.Ed.2d 412 (1989), and Monell v. … In light of the above observations, the judgments in favor of Trevino and Rubal-caba should be affirmed on the basis of the Texas Tort Claims Act § 101.106, lack of personal participation, and their qualified immunity.

Mrs. Frances B. Chafin v. Dr. Harry D. Pratt

358 F.2d 349 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 13, 1966

When we apply Barr to the facts of this case, as interpreted most favorably to appellant, it is clear that immunity applies. 12 The Defendants’ actions were clearly within the outer perimeter of their line of duty. … Under Process (1) she clearly had no right to a hearing.

Independent Taxicab Drivers' Employees v. Greater Houston Transportation Co.

760 F.2d 607 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 17, 1985

And finally, could a municipality avail itself of Parker immunity absent active state supervision, or did the state have to retain a more active role in order to immunize the non-sovereign entity? … While the latter provision falls short of expressly mentioning the establishment of ground transportation services, the statute’s broad phrasing is a strong indication of the state’s desire to abdicate in favor of municipal

Francis Nolan Augustine v. John Doe, Deputy Sheriff, Lafayette Parish

740 F.2d 322 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 16, 1984

The Fourth Amendment The facts alleged in the complaint establish a clear violation of the fourth amendment. In Payton v. … Those actions might then qualify as “authorized” and “pursuant to established state procedure”; if so, under Logan the availability of postdeprivation remedies would not bar Augustine’s § 1983 procedural due process action

Syrous Kooros v. Nicholls State University

379 F. App'x 377 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 25, 2010

“Qualified immunity protects public officials from suit unless their conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right. … Thus, a public official is entitled to qualified immunity unless a plaintiff demonstrates (1) a violation of a constitutional right and (2) that the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the violation.” 10

Kenneth J. Arenson v. Southern University Law Center, B.K. Agnihotri, and Aaron Harris

911 F.2d 1124 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 19, 1990

The district court granted the university’s motion for summary judgment on grounds of eleventh amendment immunity. … The burden of establishing a prima facie case, however, is “not onerous”, but only requires proof that the plaintiff applied for an available position for which he was qualified, but was rejected under circumstances which

Fontenot v. McCraw

777 F.3d 741 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 23, 2015

The essential principles are well established. One privilege of Texas’s state sovereignty is “not to be amenable to the suit of an individual without its consent.” Hans v. … sovereign immunity, but in any case the opinion does not discuss sovereign immunity.

Leo Pittman-Bey v. Casey Celum

557 F. App'x 310 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 14, 2014

An official enjoys qualified immunity from all damages unless his “conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.” Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009). … established law, and the district court correctly concluded that Celum and Shakir were entitled to qualified immunity.

DeLeon v. City of Dallas

141 F. App'x 258 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 7, 2005

Qualified immunity analysis is two-tiered. First, the court must determine whether the plaintiff sufficiently alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. … and refused to perform the tasks for which they were hired, again resulting in a violation of clearly established law.”

Frazar v. Hawkins

300 F.3d 530 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 24, 2002

They argue that the plaintiffs did not establish violations of federal rights which entitle them to relief under § 1983. They argue second that the State is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment. … We need not decide this thorny question.96 Instead, we hold that under well-established law for determining a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity, the State did not do so in this case.

In re: Chamber of Commerce

100 F.4th 528 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 3, 2024

In support of this argument, the Chamber points to two other contexts—qualified immunity and arbitration. In the qualified-immunity _____________________ 20 United States v. … Importantly, the burden is on the moving party to “clearly establish good cause” for the transfer. Def. Distributed v. Bruck, 30 F.4th 414, 433 (5th Cir. 2022).

L.D. Hilliard v. Board of Pardons and Paroles

759 F.2d 1190 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 8, 1985

Romano, 482 F.2d 1183, 1191 (5th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1129 , 94 S.Ct. 866 , 38 L.Ed.2d 753 (1974), that until November 8, 1983, the Board was established by the state constitution. … V Hilliard contends that the district court erred in holding that the appellees cannot be held personally liable for money damages, arguing that they are not entitled to qualified immunity for their torts.

Davis v. Brazos County Texas

98 F. App'x 976 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 10, 2004

Because Appellants failed to allege specific violations of any clearly established constitutional rights, they failed to overcome Appellees’ qualified immunity. See Nunez v. … Simms, 341 F.3d 385, 387 (5th Cir. 2003) (“The plaintiff’s showing of a violation of a clearly established constitutional right is a ‘prerequisite’ to overcoming the qualified immunity defense