Case law

Doe v. MySpace, Inc.

528 F.3d 413 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 16, 2008

To establish a profile, users must represent that they are at least fourteen years of age. … The Does also contend that MySpace’s search features qualify it as an “information content provider”, as defined in the CDA: “The term ‘information content provider’ means any person or entity that is responsible, in whole

United States v. Patrick Loring Robinson and Matthew Wilford Madsen

635 F.2d 363 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 26, 1981

He was, immediately, granted immunity but still refused to testify, deciding, apparently, that he was better off going to jail for contempt than testifying. … The government sought to establish that the conspirators, including appellants, continued to act through August 19 in an attempt to locate the marijuana or to retrieve their money.

Audry Releford, Jr. v. City of Houston

678 F. App'x 267 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 8, 2017

“Where factual disputes exist in an interlocutory appeal asserting qualified immunity, we accept the plaintiff’s version of the facts as true.” 3 To the extent that Rosemon argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity … The Supreme Court established in 1985 that “[a] police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead.” 4 To the extent that Rosemon argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity under

Parks v. Carriere Consol. School Dist.

12 F.2d 37 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 6, 1926

If the school district, as distinguished from the state, was the plaintiff, then jurisdiction would be established, for the school district would in that event be a political' corporation or quasi corporation organized under … It is true that the Supreme Court of Mississippi has construed the sections of the Mississippi Code which create sehool districts as conferring upon them the same immunity from suit as the state has. Nabors v.

Theriot v. United States

245 F.3d 388 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 1, 1998

Discretionary Conduct The United States is under no statutory duty to establish an aid to navigation at a particular place. See Tringali Bros. v. United States, 630 F.2d 1089, 1090 (5th Cir. … Consequently, the ultimate finding that Hamilton negligently operated the boat was not clearly erroneous.

Samuel Williams v. Christopher Epps

797 F.3d 276 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 28, 2015

Lastly, I note that this is not a qualified immunity case. … Hampton pleaded the affirmative defense of qualified immunity in her answer, but she never moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, she did not mention qualified immunity in her motion for judgment as a matter

Willie B. Keating v. Shell Chemical Company, Willie B. Keating v. Herbert L. Benson

610 F.2d 328 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 24, 1980

Aetna Casualty and Surety Co., La.App. 1st Cir., 359 *331 So.2d 637, cert. denied, 1978, La., 362 So.2d 578 , which established that, in order to assert the requisite intent to invoke the exception to the tort liability exemption … And Guidry, supra, clearly dictates that nothing short of an intentional tort, that is, intent to bring about the event which occurred, will bar exemption from tort liability under § 1032.

Donnika Ivy v. Michael Williams

781 F.3d 250 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 24, 2015

It is uncontested that the TEA is a public entity and that the named plaintiffs are qualified individuals with disabilities. … Here, in contrast, the TEA just *257 as clearly does not provide any portion of driver education; it merely licenses driver education schools.

Carlos Soto v. Amadeo Ortiz

526 F. App'x 370 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 26, 2013

Once the defendant pleads qualified immunity, the burden then shifts to the plaintiff, who “must rebut the defense by establishing that the official’s allegedly wrongful conduct violated clearly established law and that genuine … “To be clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” Brown v.

Christy Carty v. Texas Dept of Public Safety

733 F.3d 550 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 15, 2013

Over the course of the case, those defendants were dismissed from the case based on sovereign immunity or qualified immunity. 3  Case: 12-40750 Document: 00512342652 … from suit based on the sovereign-immunity-waiver rules established by Texas courts.

Hinojosa v. Johnson

277 F. App'x 370 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 1, 2008

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability in civil suits unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … at issue; and (3) show that the defendant’s “conduct was objectively unreasonable in light of the legal rules clearly established.”

Darlak v. Bobear

814 F.2d 1055 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 20, 1987

DHHR is clearly concerned with statewide health problems. Id. § 36:251. Charity, however, is concerned only with the administration of the hospital, which is one factor against a finding of immunity in its case. … Darlak’s due process rights were not violated, we need not reach the issue of whether the individual defendants would be protected by qualified immunity.

Hercules, Inc. v. Stevens Shipping Co.

698 F.2d 726 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 22, 1983

We think the better rule is that a cause of action for indemnity arises separately from and after liability has been established. … “It [towage agreement] clearly shows that both parties intended that Escambia have the benefit of the performance of the towage services.” .

Emma Reynolds v. United States

748 F.2d 291 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 10, 1984

The court was clearly required to do so by the foregoing provisions, which are entirely unambiguous; it had no subject matter jurisdiction. We so held in Gregory v. … United States, 659 F.2d 560, 561-62 (5th Cir.1981) (well established that time limitations en *293 acted by Congress in statutes waiving government immunity to be strictly construed in favor of government); Childers v.

Little v. KPMG LLP

575 F.3d 533 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 10, 2009

Maresh also filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the bases of absolute and qualified immunity. … Maresh also filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the bases of absolute and qualified immunity. The clients opposed these motions.

Spacil v. Crowe

489 F.2d 614 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 13, 1974

This is clearly broad enough to cover the State Department. See Rusk v. Cort, 1962, 369 U.S. 367, 375 , 82 S.Ct. 787 , 7 L.Ed.2d 809 . … The plaintiffs attempt to bring in an established principle of administrative law.

Scarlett v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad

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

The complaint clearly establishes, however, that only Scarlett had been notified by the EEOC of his right to sue prior to the filing of the complaint. … 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

Independent Taxicab Drivers' Employees v. Greater Houston Transportation Company, Etc., Arrow Northwest, Inc. v. Greater Houston Transportation Company, Etc.

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? … Id. 5 A clear articulation of state policy sets both the floor and the ceiling for municipal invocation of Parker immunity. 4 Applied in the present context, these principles make clear that the City of Houston is immune

Brown v. Burmaster

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 17, 2025

It is well established in this circuit that “[w]here the district court determines that genuine issues of material fact preclude a determination of qualified immunity, we have jurisdiction only to address the legal question … And, particularly in light of Ramirez, a reasonable jury could ultimately find that Burmaster “seized” Bruno in violation of clearly established law.

Ervin v. Quintanilla

99 F.2d 935 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 18, 1938

On the point that immunity was not established' appellant insists that there was a failure of proof that the vessel was a public vessel and in the possession of the Republic of Mexico for public ,use at the time the action … The appearance that he made was “clearly and solely for the purpose of respectfully challenging the jurisdiction of this court, and presenting this plea of immunity and in no way, except for the purpose hereinafter set forth