Case law

Sullivan v. Allred

297 F. App'x 339 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 22, 2008

A qualified immunity defense requires a two step analysis. … If a constitutional violation is found, the qualified immunity inquiry continues and examines whether the constitutional rights violated were clearly established to the extent that a reasonable person would be aware of those

McClure v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice Corrections Department

459 F. App'x 348 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 20, 2012

clearly established law.” … We have the discretion to decide which prong of the qualified immunity analysis will be addressed first. See Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 236 (2009).

State v. United States

891 F.3d 553 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 1, 2018

As Nevada reminds us, 42 U.S.C. § 10139 does clearly speak of jurisdiction. … Almost all "failure[s] to act" would be ongoing by definition, and would be immunized from the 180-day deadline that Congress provided.

Turner v. BNSF Railway

138 F.4th 224 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 14, 2025

Turner’s ADA lawsuit is clearly not precluded. 2 The majority asserts that “nor does [Turner] claim to have passed equivalent tests in the past during his tenure with BNSF Railway.” … On appeal, this court affirmed the district court, concluding that Foreman failed to establish that he was disabled, failed to establish that he was a qualified individual with a disability, and that his requested accommodations

Texas Commercial Energy v. TXU Energy, Inc.

413 F.3d 503 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 30, 2005

The Supreme Court established this doctrine in Keogh v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway, Co., 260 U.S. 156 (1922). … Id. at 423 (“the Keogh rule has been an established guidepost at the intersection of the antitrust and interstate commerce statutory regimes for 6 ½ decades . . .

Gore Incorporated v. Glickman

137 F.3d 863 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 2, 1998

Ct. 533 (1995) ("Questions of law are subject to de novo review while findings of fact will be disturbed only if we find that they are clearly erroneous."). … It is true, of course, that “[i]n the absence of express congressional consent to the award of interest separate from a general waiver of immunity to suit, the United States is immune from an interest award.”

Johnson v. Thibodaux City

887 F.3d 726 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 17, 2018

The court granted summary judgment for the city only on plaintiffs' Monell claims 1 and on the official-capacity claims, reasoning that plaintiffs had established only a single incident, which was insufficient to establish … Accordingly, we remand for consideration of qualified immunity and, if necessary, of damages on Johnson's unlawful-arrest claims against Amador, Buchanon, Gaudet, and Thibodeaux. IV.

Robert Wilkerson v. Ross Maggio, Jr., Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary

703 F.2d 909 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 25, 1983

This finding is not clearly erroneous. … Moreover, the magistrate found that Wilkerson had failed to establish that it was his “confinement in CCR that [had] caused him *913 to suffer from mild hypertension and the other alleged ailments.”

Maria Pena v. City of Rio Grande City, Texa

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 8, 2020

Nevertheless, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity unless the right, defined at a fact specific level, was clearly established at the time of the violation. See Mullenix v. Luna, 136 S. … It is not the law that is not clearly established, rather in this case the facts are not clearly established.

Willi Garner v. Candace Moore

536 F. App'x 446 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 17, 2013

immunity because Garner had not established a valid claim of retaliation. … The test for qualified immunity has two prongs: “(1) whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established 3  Case: 12-40513 Document: 00512311844 Page

Doug Crownover v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co

772 F.3d 197 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 29, 2014

While this case also involves an express duty to repair work failing to conform to the requirements of contract documents, the pertinent liabilities in Gilbert are clearly distinguishable. … Thus, the evidence establishes that the damage first occurred before August 2003.

Gary John Van Ooteghem v. Hartsell Gray

774 F.2d 1332 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 29, 1985

The en banc court held this finding “not clearly erroneous” and “compelled by the stipulated facts.” 654 F.2d at 305 . … Texas law establishes state liability for its officers who have deprived any persons “of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the constitution or laws of ... the United States.”

Anokwuru v. City of Houston

990 F.3d 956 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 16, 2021

The City also asserted that Officer Francis was protected from suit by qualified immunity. Anokwuru did not file a reply. … Aligning with the district court’s decision, the City counters that the arrest was reasonable and established no constitutional violation. We agree with the City.

Video International Production, Inc., Cross-Appellee v. Warner-Amex Cable Communications, Inc., the City of Dallas, Cross-Appellant

858 F.2d 1075 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 31, 1988

VIP argues that the City does not have sovereign immunity when it is performing a proprietary gather than a governmental function. … The building inspector was clearly the final authority in regard to the decision to implement established policy by sending out the violation notices.

Ka Fung Chan v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

634 F.2d 248 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 11, 1981

In Ruangswang , an alien attempted to qualify as an “investor.” … An investment made one day and withdrawn the next would clearly not meet the requirements of the statute and regulations.

Committe v. Gentry

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 24, 2021

Second, Committe argues that Gentry is not entitled to qualified immunity from his § 1983 claims. … He argues at length that his constitutional rights to free speech and academic freedom are clearly established, such that qualified immunity should not insulate Gentry from suit. Cf. Harlow v.

Mrs. Margaret Burnside v. James Byars

363 F.2d 744 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 21, 1966

and to encourage the members of their community to exercise their civil rights. 5 The right to communicate a matter of vital public concern is embraced in the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and therefore is clearly … The establishment of an educational program requires the formulation of rules and regulations necessary for the maintenance of an orderly program of classroom learning.

Clarke v. Stalder

121 F.3d 222 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 9, 1997

Another possible explanation is that she was, in a roundabout way, granting a defense motion for qualified immunity. This motion, however, was only filed after the conclusion of the trial. … The defense of qualified immunity is an affirmative defense, Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635, 640 , 100 S.Ct. 1920, 1923-24 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980), and must be pleaded like any other such defense. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(c).

Doe v. Rains County Independent School Dist.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 4, 1995

White appeals from the district court's denial of her motion for summary judgment, in which she asserted qualified immunity. We do not reach the issue of qualified immunity. … When reviewing a district court's rejection of a defendant's assertion of qualified immunity, we start by asking whether plaintiffs have alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

United States v. Jimmy D. McGuire

79 F.3d 1396 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 26, 1996

Calverley carefully lays out a series of bright-line rules, reconciling many of our precedents and overruling all others: “Although most of our opinions have recognized that an error must be clearly evident to be plain, a … Klevenhagen, 5 F.3d 103, 108 (5th Cir.1993) (deciding that officials have qualified immunity against suits under § 1983 if their actions were reasonable in light of judicial precedent at the time of the offense). .