Case law

Cambre v. Gottardi

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 6, 2025

On appeal, the Defendants argue that the “district court erred in failing to identify any clearly established law particularized to the facts of this case that precluded a grant of qualified immunity.” … Clearly established law for qualified immunity purposes means that the law is “sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right.” 15 “[C]learly established

United States v. Allen

625 F.3d 830 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 4, 2010

Ramirez in which the Court denied qualified immunity to agents who acted on a search warrant that was insufficiently particular. … immunity afforded an officer.”

Sylvester Martin v. Ronnie Seal

510 F. App'x 309 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 31, 2013

make out a constitutional violation, . . . whether the right [violated] was clearly established.” … See Gobert, 463 F.3d at 345 n.14 (noting that once a qualified immunity defense has been raised, “plaintiff has the burden to rebut the qualified immunity defense by establishing that the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct

John Languirand, Cross-Appellant v. John Hayden, an Individual, City of Pass Christian, Etc., Cross-Appellee

717 F.2d 220 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 17, 1983

. § 1983 . 1 Conscious of the grievous injury suffered by the plaintiff-appellee, we nevertheless reverse because the evidence fails to establish such a custom or policy of the City defendant as required for municipal liability … We note that Hayden apparently had no qualified immunity under Mississippi law. See Holland v. Martin, 214 Miss. 1 , 56 So.2d 398 (1952). .

Connie McAllister v. DeSoto County, Mississippi, e

470 F. App'x 313 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 1, 2012

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … light of clearly established law at the time of the violation.”

29 Fair empl.prac.cas. 433, 29 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 32,717 Oliver W. Scarlett, H. B. Starkes, Franklin D. R. Bell, David Jones, W. J. Odol, L. A. Waters, W. K. Lindsey, J. Wimyond Jones, Horace v. Thomas and William D. Rood, Franklin D. R. Bell, W. J. Odol, W. K. Lindsey, Cross-Appellants v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Co., Cross-Appellee. v. United Transportation Union, Cross-Appellee

676 F.2d 1043 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 24, 1982

Even if one accepts that these charges exist, it is clear that three of them were filed after the plaintiffs had brought suit. 10 The complaint clearly establishes, however, that only Scarlett had been notified by the EEOC … We therefore conclude that section 703(h) offers no immunity to the defendants and affirm the trial court's judgment that those plaintiffs who established a prima facie case were entitled to seniority relief under section

4 Fair empl.prac.cas. 878, 4 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 7865 Howard Beale, Jr. v. Winston Blount, Postmaster, United States Post Office

461 F.2d 1133 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 14, 1972

The legislative history of that act clearly reflects that Congress did not intend to modify the requirement of exhaustion of available *1138 administrative remedies in mandamus suits. 1962 U.S.Code Congressional and Administrative … The United States Supreme Court lias held that a “sue and be sued” clause constitutes a waiver of sovereign immunity. Keifer & Keifer v.

Batiste Ex Rel. Pierre v. Theriot

458 F. App'x 351 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 10, 2012

Qualified immunity protects officials acting under color of state law “from liability of civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To overcome a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff has the burden of showing that the actions were not objectively reasonable and that they violated clearly established law. Burns-Toole v.

Smith v. Brenoettsy

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 16, 1998

Whitley then filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting qualified immunity,3 which Smith failed to answer. … Not surprisingly, Whitley does not contend that the prohibition against Brengettsy’s alleged actions was not clearly established.

TX Alli for Retd Amer v. Scott

28 F.4th 669 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 16, 2022

States are immune from private suits unless they consent or unless Congress validly strips their immunity. See Sossamon v. Texas, 563 U.S. 277, 283–84 (2011) (citing Alden v. … See id. at 614 (“Sovereign immunity has no role to play here.”).

Department of Transportation & Development v. PNL Asset Management Co.

123 F.3d 241 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 15, 1997

Section 106(a) clearly expresses Congressional intent to abrogate sovereign immunity. No party contends otherwise. … As Madison noted in the Federalist No. 42, “the power of establishing uniform laws of bankruptcy is () intimately connected with the regulation of commerce.”

Terry James v. Dallas Housing Authority

526 F. App'x 388 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 16, 2013

“If the plaintiff fails to state a constitutional claim or if the defendant’s conduct was objectively reasonable under clearly established law, then the government official is entitled to qualified immunity.” Hampton v. … To overcome qualified immunity, there must be evidence that § 982.553(c) or its use was unconstitutional under clearly established law, which he has not done. See Cantrell v.

Cantu v. Tamez

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 5, 2024

Here, we resolve the inquiry on the “clearly established” step. See Mullenix v. Luna, 577 U.S. 7, 11 (2015). … We (A) deny qualified immunity to Officers Tamez and Rodriguez and (B) grant qualified immunity to Officer Ochoa.

Lee v. Conecuh County Board of Education

634 F.2d 959 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 22, 1981

The trial court found that defendants successfully rebutted the prima facie case of intentional racial discrimination established by Gantt. Because we find that its holding is clearly erroneous, we reverse. … The finding of the lower court that the position at Repton High remains open is clearly erroneous.

Carlos Chacon v. City of Austin, Texas

577 F. App'x 355 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 11, 2014

established law such that qualified immunity is inappropriate. … Reasonableness in light of clearly established law Our second consideration in analyzing qualified immunity is whether the officers’ actions were unreasonable in light of clearly established law.

Williamson v. Williamson

844 F.2d 1166 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 16, 1988

Sec. 85-3-21 (Supp.1987) sets forth the qualifications for claiming a homestead exemption as well as the rights and immunities appertaining thereto. … We decline, however, to read this proposition so broadly, since the factual context in which it was enunciated is clearly distinguishable.

United States v. Robert Lyle Lamp, Jr., Michael J. Yuretich and Mark Alan Eberwine

779 F.2d 1088 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 6, 1986

Werning was extensively cross-examined about his prior arrests, his involvement with illegal drugs, and his immunity agreement with the government. … We agree with the government that the district court was entitled to conclude that the witness was not qualified as a character witness and could not have been so qualified because his acquaintance with Yuretich ended five

Ramirez v. Granado

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 10, 2025

’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law.’” … B The remaining issue is whether Plaintiff-Appellant’s version of the disputed facts constitutes a violation of clearly established law.

Benedict Emesowum v. Houston Police Department

561 F. App'x 372 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 7, 2014

In any event, his alleged claims would not survive the qualified immunity defense raised by the police officers. … whether the right at issue was “clearly established” at the time of the defendants’ alleged misconduct.

Denise Chavez, United States of America, Intervenor v. Arte Publico Press Nicolas Kanellos University of Houston

157 F.3d 282 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 1, 1998

Unless the state is clearly informed that its actions will result in the loss of immunity, the dissent would not find a knowing and voluntary waiver of state sovereign immunity. … It may be that this allows an end-run around Seminole, but *298 this end-run is one grounded in the text of the Constitution and well-established precedent. 54 I respectfully dissent. .