Case law

22 Fair empl.prac.cas. 158, 15 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 7940 Anthony T. Lee, United States of America, Plaintiff- Intervenor, Amicus Curiae, National Education Association, Inc., Plaintiff-Intervenor v. Pickens County School System

563 F.2d 143 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 1, 1977

If these elements are established, Mr. … Pope were entitled to Singleton protection for his first reassignment, it would be necessary to clearly establish why an individual who was qualified to be the principal of an all black high school suddenly became unqualified

Doop v. Chapman

211 F. App'x 246 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 2, 2006

The district court concluded that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity as to the Doops’s federal constitutional claims and to state statutory and common-law official immunity with respect to their claims based … violation is made out on the facts alleged, the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the violation.

Bedingfield Ex Rel. Bedingfield v. Deen

487 F. App'x 219 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 6, 2012

Qualified Immunity “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 … See id. at 2080 (noting that an official is entitled qualified immunity unless plaintiff demonstrates “that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct”) (citation omitted).

John Eldon Smith, or Anthony Isalldo MacHetti v. Charles Balkcom, Warden, Georgia State Prison

660 F.2d 573 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 2, 1981

That a death-qualified jury is more likely to convict than a nondeath-qualified jury does not demonstrate which jury is impartial. … Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522, 538 , 95 S.Ct. 692, 701 , 42 L.Ed.2d 690 (1975), clearly establishes that the “venires from which juries are drawn must not systematically exclude distinctive groups in the community and thereby fail

Randolph v. Texas Rehabilitation Commission

214 F. App'x 424 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 18, 2007

on qualified immunity. … First, we must determine whether the plaintiff's allegations, if true, establish a violation of a clearly established federal right.6 If not, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.7 If a violation is established

Doe v. San Antonio Independent School District

197 F. App'x 296 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 18, 2006

If so, “the next sequential step is to ask whether the right was clearly established. … Ultimately, a state actor is entitled to qualified immunity if his or her conduct was objectively reasonable in light of the legal rules that were clearly established at the time of his or her actions.

United States v. Bettie Mae Strong

891 F.2d 82 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 8, 1989

This general rule is qualified, however, by, inter alia, the proviso that “in the case of conviction by a plea of guilty or nolo contendere containing a stipulation that specifically establishes a more serious offense than … The .drafters clearly did intend to draw a distinction between the class of defendants who plead guilty or no contest and file a stipulation of facts establishing commission of a more serious offense, and the class of defendants

Gas Light Company of Columbus v. Georgia Power Company and the Southern Company

440 F.2d 1135 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 23, 1971

As will be seen, a frame of reference is established by it and some of the decisions which have followed it. In Parker v. … In holding that Parker immunity applied, the court said that North Carolina’s program qualified as a product of state action because it was “under the active supervision of the State”, even though the rates were of private

Rubin v. De La Cruz

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 11, 2025

De La Cruz moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity (“QI”). The city also moved for summary judgment. … We agree that De La Cruz did not violate any clearly established law and is thus entitled to QI.

Thompson v. Johnson

348 F. App'x 919 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 6, 2009

Second, if a constitutional right has been violated, we must ask whether the right was clearly established. Id. … Because Briones’ conduct did not violate a constitutional right, there is no need to continue the qualified immunity analysis. We therefore agree that Briones was entitled to qualified immunity.

Rogers v. Hooper

271 F. App'x 431 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 27, 2008

qualified immunity defense fails. … We agree they were entitled to qualified immunity.

7 Fair empl.prac.cas. 586, 7 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9237 Willie L. Morrow and Jerome Mangum, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross v. Giles Crisler Commissioner of Public Safety of Mississippi,defendants-Appellees-Cross

491 F.2d 1053 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 27, 1974

No qualified black applicant may be passed over for an appointment in the Mississippi Highway Safety Patrol except for an applicant who clearly and objectively possesses higher qualifications for that particular appointment … It only remains for the highway patrol, in the pursuit of competence, to immunize itself in an indisputable manner from all appearances of racial discrimination.

United States v. Freeman Charles Outlaw, Jr.

319 F.3d 701 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 27, 2003

Johnson, 660 F.2d 21, 23 (2d Cir.1981) (rejecting appellant’s argument that probable cause is not established when a dog alerts on only the residual odors of a drug). … The question before us is not whether a *705 dog sniff can establish probable cause in a warrantless search without showing evidence of a dog's training and reliability.

Pederson v. LA State University

213 F.3d 858 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 27, 2000

Id. at 115 n.2. 6 capacities on the basis of qualified immunity, and also dismissed the remaining § 1983 and Fourteenth Amendment claims. … See Appellants’ Brief at 34-35 (“Although the District Court (contrary to Rules 23 and 52) made no factual findings supporting its holding as to numerosity, the trial evidence clearly established the numerosity element

Wallace Watts v. Odom Graves, Sheriff

720 F.2d 1416 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 12, 1983

The Supreme Court has clearly held in United States v. … The issuance of warrants is clearly within the course and scope of Rowe’s judicial function and he is therefore immune from any damage action occasioned thereby.

Castillo v. Montelepre, Inc.

999 F.2d 931 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 25, 1993

The Medical Malpractice Act Louisiana has established a statutory scheme for the prosecution of medical malpractice claims against qualified health care providers. … In the event a qualified provider settles for its $100,000 policy limits, its liability becomes "admitted and established" for the purposes of any subsequent action by the malpractice victim against the Fund for additional

Mozell and Delores Brooks v. Walker County Hospital District

688 F.2d 334 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 4, 1982

qualify for such care), their argument has some force. … Other cases involve the issue of the hospital’s governmental immunity. Ritch v.

United States v. Abrego

141 F.3d 142 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 26, 1998

The transfer of the $108,000 to Vega clearly constituted “a giving over to the care or possession of another,” and thus a transaction for purposes of establishing a money laundering offense. … Coleman “ha[d] testified that he is not qualified as an expert in that area of practice.” The district court overruled the objection on the ground that Dr.

White v. Amoco Oil Co.

835 F.2d 1113 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 19, 1988

These findings are not clearly erroneous. IV. … Even if the stipulations did not establish General Gas Company’s expertise, the district court’s finding that General Gas was a sophisticated user is not clearly erroneous. 4- Was the warning given adequate for a sophisticated

Jarvis v. Hall

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 5, 2023

Once a defendant raises qualified immunity, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the alleged conduct violated a clearly established right. Id.; Cole v. … the officers violated a constitutional right, he has failed to demonstrate that “right was clearly established.”