Case law

Bravo v. Dallas ISD

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 1, 2026

Under this framework, an employee must first establish a prime facie case. Id. … But Ames’s clarification of the Title VII analysis does not clearly apply here. And our McDonnell Douglas authority is flexible enough to survive Ames.

Dawes v. City of Dallas

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 3, 2024

Qualified immunity cases present two questions. First, did the officers violate a constitutional right? And second, was the right at issue clearly established at the time of the officers’ alleged violation? … the qualified immunity analysis is whether the officer had “fair notice” that his conduct was unlawful.

Johnson v. LA Dept of Education

343 F.3d 732 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 22, 2005

7 contractual principles.13 In these cases, the defendants were authorized by the State to accept the benefits of substantial sums of federal Spending Clause money burdened with the clearly … That interest, which is undeniably significant and clearly reflected in the legislative history, flows with every dollar spent by a department or agency receiving federal funds.

Spiess v. C. Itoh & Co.

643 F.2d 353 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 24, 1981

While their analysis may be supported by the literal text of article XXII(3), the clearly established intent of the parties to the treaty overrides such literalism. Accordingly, we hold that C. … Itoh-America, on the other hand, argues that the “of their choice” provision entails a broad immunity from all domestic employment legislation.

United States v. Garcia

470 F.3d 1143 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 22, 2006

To establish plain error, the defendant must show that (1) there is an error, (2) the error is clear or obvious, and (3) the error affected his substantial rights, i.e., the error affected the outcome of the district court … The district court must nonetheless consider the applicable offense category and sentence range under the Guidelines and our post-Booker precedent, and it should clearly state its reasons for the sentence it ultimately imposes

United States v. Frederick Arayatanon

980 F.3d 444 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 13, 2020

Thus, the district court did not clearly err in applying the § 2D1.1(b)(5) enhancement. E. … as a drug trafficking offense, not whether it was sufficiently reliable to establish that a conviction occurred.

Michael Nall v. BNSF Railway Company

917 F.3d 335 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 15, 2019

Once the plaintiff has established a prima facie case, the defendant must come forward with a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the adverse employment action. … Robinson , 902 F.3d 483 , 498 (5th Cir. 2018) (Willett, J., concurring) (describing the "kudzu-like creep" of qualified immunity law). More than 57,000 court opinions have cited it.

Donald Blackmon and Richard Glen Deyoung v. Brookshire Grocery Company

835 F.2d 1135 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 22, 1988

There are two tests for determining whether a person qualifies as an exempt executive, the long test, 29 C.F.R. § 541.1 , and the short test, 29 C.F.R. § 541.119 . … The short test qualifies an employee as an executive if the employee is not a mechanic, carpenter, or other craftsman, and earns more than $250 per week.

Grice v. Younger

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 8, 2023

We first (A) explain why Officer Younger is entitled to qualified immunity on Grice’s Fourth Amendment claim. … Officer Younger is entitled to qualified immunity unless he violated a constitutional right (prong one) that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct (prong two). Ontiveros v.

Jessie Hartfield v. State of Mississippi, Carrie D. Lapsy v. City of Jackson, Henry Horn v. State of Mississippi, Ralph Edwin King, Jr. v. State of Mississippi, Stephen Rutledge v. City of Jackson

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.

Nina Sue Chavers, Individually and as Natural Guardian and Tutrix on Behalf of Her Minor Children, Michael Lee Chavers and Lori Ann Chavers v. Exxon Corporation and Diamond M Company, Fred Williams v. Delta Construction Co., Inc., and Texaco, Inc.

716 F.2d 315 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 3, 1983

Exxon moved for summary judgment, claiming statutory employer status with its consequential tort immunity. … In that instance, Exxon would not be Chavers' statutory employer and would not have tort immunity.

Melder v. Allstate Corp.

404 F.3d 328 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 16, 2005

The removing party has the burden of establishing improper joinder by showing: Plaintiffs' inability to establish a claim under state law against the non-diverse defendant; or actual fraud in pleading jurisdictional facts … 6 Recognized exceptions to sovereign immunity include: a state's waiver of sovereign immunity, see Idaho v.

Lee 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

Mark Tarka v. G. Charles Franklin

891 F.2d 102 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 29, 1989

The state action was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds relating to the doctrine of official immunity. Plaintiff appealed his case to the Texas Supreme Court without success. … Because we reject Tarka’s right of access to the recommendation letters founded on FERPA, it follows that the defendants have not shed their qualified immunity from suit for denying that access. Mitchell v.

In Re James A. Dinnan, Maija S. Blaubergs v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, James A. Dinnan, Movant-Appellant

661 F.2d 426 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 16, 1981

There is no question that the doctrine of privilege or immunity from testifying has been narrowly proscribed. … “The peer review system has evolved as the most reliable method for assuring promotion of the candidates best qualified to serve the needs of the institution.” Johnson v.

Khan v. Garland

69 F.4th 265 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 30, 2023

Ct. 1993) (“The present case is not similar to those cases where the condition of the vehicle clearly indicated that it had been stolen or 6 Case: 21-60146 Document … an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed.”

Randy Argo v. Brazoria County, Texas

399 F. App'x 1 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 10, 2010

This included an instruction on whether the defendants met the two-part test for qualified immunity. … immunity.

Miller v. TX Tech Univ Hlth

342 F.3d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 27, 2005

be interpreted under ordinary contractual principles.13 In these cases, the defendants were authorized by the State to accept the benefits of substantial sums of federal Spending Clause money burdened with the clearly … That interest, which is undeniably significant and clearly reflected in the legislative history, flows with every dollar spent by a department or agency receiving federal funds.

George G. GRIFFON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent

832 F.2d 51 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 27, 1987

Nor, in fact, does the standard require the government to establish that its decision to litigate was based on a substantial probability of prevailing.’ H.R.Rep. … immunity, even though this could be characterized as saying that the officer was “ ‘reasonably unreasonable.’ ” Exercising our judgment in this matter, cf.

Mayor of Columbus v. Dennison

69 F. 58 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 23, 1895

The bonds were voted as a donation by the constitutional majority of two-thirds of the qualified voters, as recited in the face of the bonds themselves, and, this only barrier against legislative power being removed, the … legislature clearly had the right to ratify.