Case law

Salinas v. Roadway Express, Inc.

735 F.2d 1574 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 16, 1984

This Court reviews the district court’s findings under the clearly erroneous standard. In doing so, we cannot be left to speculate as to the factual basis for the district court’s conclusion. … It is stressed, however, that it is encumbent upon the court to clearly express the factual basis for its determination.

United States v. Joseph Lamar Jones

554 F.2d 251 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 20, 1977

This Court has previously held that to sustain a conviction under this section it is not necessary to show that the defendant directly participated in the use of the telephone, where it is established that the defendant caused … In this case, the evidence clearly indicated that defendant gave out thé credit card numbers to individuals and told them to use the credit card numbers to call him.

Kelley v. Alpine Site Services

110 F.4th 812 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 8, 2024

Without such evidence, they failed to establish clear error or how the district court’s factual findings were inconsistent with the evidence. See Guzman v. … It was thus not clearly erroneous for the district court to find on this record that the “Plaintiffs, as part of their job duties, were expected to and did in fact load” materials onto Alpine trailers, and “[t]hese job duties

United States v. Andino-Ortega

608 F.3d 305 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 8, 2010

. § 22.04(a), qualified as a crime of violence. … Because Andino-Ortega did not object below, he must establish that the district court plainly erred in applying the guidelines. Arviso-Mata, 442 F.3d at 384.

United States v. Valentine

401 F.3d 609 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 25, 2005

leaves a defendant with a “pending charge” such that he is not qualified to serve as a juror IV. … because he currently has “a charge pending Valentine’s most substantial argument is against him for the commission” of a felony. that the evidence is insufficient to establish, be- United States v.

John Sydney Cook, Jr. v. United States

379 F.2d 966 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 29, 1967

the court’s mind to require the requested inquiry of each juror, or another poll of the jury, or a direction that they reconsider their verdict until this serious uncertainty had been removed and the intent of the jury clearly … “Based” is defined: “to place or establish on a base or basis; ground; found; establish.” See The Random House Dictionary of the English Language, 1966 ed.

Davis v. West Community Hospital

755 F.2d 455 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 21, 1985

Damages Even if the evidence were adequate to establish the element of malice, Dr. Davis has even more clearly failed to establish another essential element of the tort, i.e., that he suffered any actual damages. … THE HOSPITAL’S IMMUNITY FROM PUNITIVE DAMAGES The hospital system is immune from punitive damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . City of Newport v.

Hentz v. Hargett

71 F.3d 1169 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 8, 1996

Hentz then related that his previously immunized 5 The examiner found no indication of deception. … Because the district court's finding is supported by the record, it is not clearly erroneous.

Smith v. Western Electric Co.

770 F.2d 520 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 13, 1985

Because the district court’s findings of fact are not clearly erroneous, we affirm its judgment. I. … We do not find the district court’s rejection of this statistical study clearly erroneous.

Jim Robinson v. J. Stanley Pottinger, Asst. Attorney General of the United States of America, William P. Nunn, Intervenors-Appellants

512 F.2d 775 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 24, 1975

The procedure for establishing the initial council districts which is provided in the Act is clearly applicable to Montgomery only. No other means of establishing initial council districts is set forth in the Act. … The Court reviewed California statutes which require that qualifying fees accompany the statement of candidacy.

Sarmiento v. Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners ex rel. Avery

939 F.2d 1242 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 28, 1991

Facts and Proceedings Below In 1985, Sarmiento moved with his wife to the small town of Comfort, Texas, intending to establish a veterinary practice. … Notably, no federal claims were asserted against Seidensticker. 3 The claims against the other defendants were disposed of before trial by stipulation or dismissed on the grounds of qualified immunity, leaving only the slander

Can Hockey v. Marquardt

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 26, 2022

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 … To establish that qualified immunity does not apply, the plaintiff must prove that the state actor (1) violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was “clearly established” at the time of

W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. The Floridice Company, Inc.

381 F.2d 613 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 21, 1967

in circumsta/nces that qualify them as retail within the Secretary’s guidelines. … Clearly, in the light subsequently shed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Wirtz v. Steepleton General Tire Co., reported sub nom. Idaho Sheet Metal Works, Inc. v.

Kreit v. Quinn

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 11, 2022

Look no further than Cam- reta, 563 U.S. at 701–03, in which the Court concluded that a child protective service worker who had received qualified immunity nonetheless had stand- ing to appeal. … that right was not “clearly established.”

Goff v. Taylor

706 F.2d 574 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 6, 1983

While ERISA preempts state law, 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (a), it clearly was not intended to affect the operation of other federal law. … These plans are established pursuant to the Keogh-Smathers Act, Pub.L.

Rivera v. Quarterman

505 F.3d 349 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 22, 2007

established federal law. … This failure, the prisoner argued, rendered the state’s decision denying his incompetency claim an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

Mdphysicians & Associates, Inc. v. State Board of Insurance, a Body Politic of the State of Texas

957 F.2d 178 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 1, 1992

To allow an entrepreneurial venture to qualify as an “employer” by establishing and maintaining a multiple employer welfare arrangement without input by the employers who subscribe to the plan would twist the language of … If the MDP Plan qualified as an EWBP, subsection (b)(6)(A)(ii) would apply because the MDP Plan is not fully insured.

Jett v. Zink

474 F.2d 149 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 9, 1973

Although the exact scope of our opinion disposing of these appeals is questioned it clearly decided two things. … that the Sterling Agreement was carefully drawn to make the obligations of Jett and Chamberlain personal obligations, that the Agreement was a mere contract to pay money and transfer oil royalties, and that the Agreement clearly

Carter v. Orleans Parish Public Schools

725 F.2d 261 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 21, 1984

That aggrieved persons have a private right of action under section 504 is now well established in this circuit. See Marvin H. v. Austin Indep. School Dist., 714 F.2d 1348, 1356-57 (5th Cir.1983); Helms v. … Drew, 359 F.Supp. 746 (E.D.Va.1973) (county judge and clerk not immune to suit seeking, inter alia, expunction of records classifying plaintiff as mentally ill). . Cf. Carter v.

Custer v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc.

503 F.3d 415 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 24, 2007

(“Murphy”), he was informed that because he was totally disabled his employment would be terminated and he would no longer qualify for coverage under the Group Insurance Plan for Employees of Murphy Oil Corp. … But the evidence the plaintiffs rely on, namely Smith’s testimony, does not establish such a policy.