Case law

Lawrence v. Univ TX Med Br Galv

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 5, 1999

Wittich, were entitled to qualified immunity. Finally, the district court remanded Lawrence’s state law claims in the 212th Judicial District Court of Galveston County, Texas. … Additionally, because we hold that Lawrence failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact on her claims on the merits, we affirm summary judgment without reaching the issue of qualified immunity.23 Finally,

Kathryn Rothkamm v. USA

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 22, 2015

The Supreme Court has “said on many occasions that a waiver of sovereign immunity must be ‘unequivocally expressed’ in statutory text.” 8 Legislative history cannot supply a waiver that is not clearly … First, under Chevron, if the language of the statute, § 7811(d), clearly provides for tolling (i.e., a waiver of sovereign immunity), then that ends the inquiry.

Virgie Lee Valley v. Rapides Prsh Sch Bd

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 28, 1997

Second, the appellants’ argument of qualified immunity is without merit. … It is well established law in this Circuit that the defenses of qualified and absolute immunity do not extend to suits for injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Chrissy F. By Medley v.

Scott Mathews v. City of San Antonio, Texas

674 F. App'x 394 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 6, 2017

PER CURIAM:* Plaintiff-appellant Scott Mathews appeals from the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees, three police officers, on the basis of qualified immunity. … But it is well- established that Mathews, as the plaintiff, bears the burden of negating the qualified-immunity defense. See, e.g., Poole, 691 F.3d at 627.

Donnie Roberts v. Rick Thaler, Director

681 F.3d 597 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 15, 2012

“A state court’s decision is contrary to clearly established federal law if it applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth in Supreme Court cases . . . or if the state court decide[s] a case differently than … Similarly, “[a] state court’s decision involves an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law if the state court ‘correctly identifies the governing legal rule but applies it unreasonably to the facts of

George v. SI Grp

36 F.4th 611 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 3, 2022

The principles that govern the Rule 12(b)(6) inquiry are well established; we consider three of them. … Thus, Evergreen is immune from George’s products-liability claim unless George pleaded facts establishing Evergreen’s liability as a “nonmanufacturing seller” under subchapter 82.003.5 George argues that

Hartfield v. Mississippi

367 F.2d 362 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 11, 1966

State, is clearly controlled by State of Georgia, Petitioner, v. Rachel et al., 1965, 384 U.S. 780 , 86 S.Ct. 1783 , 16 L.Ed.2d 925 , decided June 20, 1966. … Further, if such were the case, he would be immune to prosecution in any court under the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the decision in Hamm v.

Baldwin v. Daniels

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 29, 2001

immunity and in requiring her to prove that Daniels’ actions were arbitrary and capricious in order to establish her procedural due process claim against him in his official capacity. … Accordingly, we need not address Baldwin’s claims regarding qualified immunity or jury instructions relating to this claim. IV.

Hospitality House, Inc v. Gilbert

298 F.3d 424 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 16, 2002

Real Parties in Interest, 259 F.3d 387, 391 (5th Cir.2001) (noting that "[w]ith appellate jurisdiction [over the state's interlocutory appeal of the denial of Eleventh Amendment immunity] established," it was proper "to address … We thus conclude that to make a settlement agreement part of a dismissal order by incorporation, Kokkonen requires a district court to clearly indicate its intention within the dismissal order itself by expressly incorporating

Kimbell Foods, Inc. v. Republic National Bank Of Dallas

557 F.2d 491 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 25, 1977

the parties' intention, the words of the contract clearly providing that the security agreement should cover future indebtedness. … This statute could be read as ameliorating the impact of the choateness doctrine by waiving the immunity it would grant, thus implicitly recognizing the applicability of the choateness doctrine to SBA liens.

Henry Lee Bryan v. Clarence Jones, Sheriff, Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., Fidelity & Deposit Co. Andlena Giddens

519 F.2d 44 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 15, 1975

In Johnson , which involved a claim of false imprisonment only, we concluded that defendant failed to establish that his detention of plaintiff was made in good faith without reaching the underlying issue of whether this … These cases find a grant of qualified good faith immunity necessary where the state official’s functions involve the exercise of discretion to ensure timely, principled and fearless decision- ^ making. See Pierson v.

Laurence G. Russell, William L. Hanna, and Eddie D. Langwell v. National Mediation Board

775 F.2d 1284 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 23, 1985

Other courts have criticized our decision in KKK for failing to apply the principle that waivers of sovereign immunity are to be narrowly construed. See Tongol v. … The reasonableness standard requires the government to establish that its position has a reasonable basis both in law and in fact. Martin, 754 F.2d at 1264; H.R. Rep.

Hussain v. Boston Old Colony Insurance

311 F.3d 623 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 1, 2002

Even though establishing the applicability of this statute in terms of the government’s interest and its waiver of sovereign immunity has been accomplished, we are nevertheless required to decide whether the post-judgment … (or prevents) the waiver of immunity, is not at stake.

In re Itron, Inc.

883 F.3d 553 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 21, 2018

Wash. 1975), in which the district court held that state officers sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 waive attorney-client privilege by asserting qualified immunity, ion index="68" url="https://cite. case.law/citations/? … (discussing qualified immunity) ).

Ellis Hicks v. Dept of Public Safety & Corr

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 21, 2020

“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 … For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment denying qualified immunity for Lawson and REVERSE the judgment denying qualified immunity for LeBlanc.

Brittney Terry v. Spring Indep School Distr

669 F. App'x 200 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 22, 2016

The defendants each moved to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds, contending that Terry’s Third Amended Complaint failed to allege facts sufficient to state a supervisory liability claim against them. … “Qualified immunity protects governmental officials from liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” 2 As the

BEPCO, L.P. v. Santa Fe Minerals, Inc.

675 F.3d 466 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 15, 2012

by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1441(d).1 BEPCO filed a motion to remand on February 18, 2011. … Thus, it contended that Transocean “joined ICAROM, an entity that clearly [did] not belong in th[e] case, in order to manufacture an opportunity for removal to federal court.”

Pat S. Holloway v. Judge Dee Brown Walker

790 F.2d 1170 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 4, 1986

449 U.S. 24 , 101 S.Ct. 183 , 66 L.Ed.2d 185 (1980), although factually similar to the case at bar, antedated the Parratt/Hudson rule entirely and discussed only the issue of whether private parties who conspired with an immune … It was the “established state procedure” itself that was challenged in Loudermill and thus the Parratt/Hudson rule, which was not mentioned by either the majority or the dissent, clearly did not apply.

Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. v. Allied Chemical Corp.

652 F.2d 503 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 4, 1981

This hypothetical situation is clearly not the case here. … FERC must therefore clearly set out the grounds that form the basis for the denial of discretionary relief. Id.

Becerra v. Asher

105 F.3d 1042 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 7, 1997

The district court, after allowing limited discovery on the issue of qualified immunity, granted summary judgment in favor of the appellees. DISCUSSION 5 Doe v. Taylor Indep. Sch. … immunity defense, that this right was clearly established. 4 In addressing vicarious liability, we recognized that local governments and supervisory personnel are not subject to § 1983 liability under a vicarious liability