Case law

United States v. Rodriguez

523 F.3d 519 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 1, 2008

Based on our review of the record, the district court clearly considered and rejected these arguments as a basis for a non-Guideline sentence. … Fast-track programs are proper only when “clearly warranted by local conditions within a particular district.” Id.

American Trucking Ass'n v. Interstate Commerce Commission

656 F.2d 1115 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 21, 1981

Further, because of sovereign immunity, the Alaska Railroad is immune from the antitrust laws notwithstanding the fact that the exemption generally abolished antitrust immunity for railroads engaging in exempt TOFC/COFC transportation … Agency regulations should, of course, be clearly drafted to provide concerned parties with notice of the effect of the regulations on them.

Heitkamp v. Dyke

943 F.2d 1435 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 15, 1991

Although this provision does not expressly mention the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 36 it clearly encompasses ERISA-qualified benefit plans. … While there is a distinction between the state and federal exemptions, they are not clearly inconsistent.

15 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1342, 15 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 7864 Hollie Cotton and Young Herrod, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Ravon Hinton and Chauncey L. Gardner v. United States Pipe & Foundry Company Coke By-Products Plant

559 F.2d 1326 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 30, 1977

The relief sought in the complaint may be helpful to establish a benchmark by which to compare the settlement terms. See Norman v. … successful completion of the 30 working-day qualifying period in Paragraph No. 6 below.

Eiland v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp.

58 F.3d 176 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 14, 1995

Westinghouse objected, and the trial court ruled that Adams was qualified to state an opinion on how the accident happened. Westinghouse contends that Adams was not qualified to testify as an expert. … Under Mississippi law, the general rule is that where it is established that future consequences from an injury to a person will ensue, recovery therefor may be had, but such future consequences must be established in terms

Delta Drilling Company v. National Labor Relations Board

406 F.2d 109 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 13, 1969

Clearly, if the election was so held the decision of the Regional Director is final, binding, and immune to attack in this Court. … We think these cases, one before the Board decision in Delta and the other less than four weeks later, clearly articulate a commendable, indeed the only tenable, Board policy.

Essie R. McDaniel v. Temple Independent School District

770 F.2d 1340 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 16, 1985

The question presented is whether the district court’s findings are clearly erroneous and, thus, should be set aside. … We hold that the court’s conclusion was not clearly erroneous.

Stephen Hartman v. Layne Walker

685 F. App'x 366 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 18, 2017

He contends, for example, that the court erred in concluding the arresting officers were entitled to qualified immunity against his unlawful-arrest claim, asserting they lacked probable cause. … And, in the absence of qualified immunity for the underlying arrest, Hartman asserts his claims for unlawful arrest, excessive force, equal-protection violation, forging search-warrant affidavits, civil conspiracy, and malicious

United States v. James Thurmond Boatwright and Benjamin Frank Boatwright

446 F.2d 913 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 11, 1971

The closest evidence to this point is that Frank told Sheffield that the car belonged to James and that he (James) wanted to drive it down to Pensacola, a statement which Frank later qualified. … After a careful review of the testimony, we conclude that the district judge is not clearly erroneous.

Otkins v. Gilboy

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

The officers asserted qualified immunity and moved for summary judgment, which the district court granted. … The second question is whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct.” Morrow v. Meachum, 917 F.3d 870, 874 (5th Cir. 2019) (quotation omitted).

Benjamin v. Harvey

95 F.3d 49 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 12, 1996

He asserted that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity in their individual capacities because they had violated his clearly established constitutional rights. … The first inquiry in examining a defense of qualified immunity asserted in a motion for summary judgment is whether the plaintiff has alleged "the violation of a clearly established constitutional right

Scribner v. Dillard

141 F. App'x 240 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 20, 2005

Qualified immunity is separate and distinct from a defense based upon the intervening act of a neutral intermediary. “The qualified immunity analysis is a two-step inquiry. … First, a court must decide whether the plaintiffs' allegations, if true, establish a violation of a clearly established right. . . .

Vicon, Inc., Cross-Appellant v. Cmi Corporation, Cross-Appellee

657 F.2d 768 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 30, 1981

ViCon, a Louisiana corporation qualified to do business in Mississippi, is engaged in the asphalt construction business. … That figure clearly establishes the excessive cost of maintaining the plant.

Powers v. Northside Independent School District

662 F. App'x 306 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 5, 2016

NISD offers three arguments why Powers and Wernli failed to establish a waiver of NISD’s governmental immunity under the Act. We reject each. … Bexar Cty., Tex., 560 F.3d 404, 408–09 (5th Cir. 2009) (citing cases and noting in the qualified-immunity context that if the 1 We note that NISD’s reply brief contains new arguments on the “appropriate law enforcement

Kemp Ex Rel. Kemp v. Perkins

324 F. App'x 409 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 7, 2009

However, this Court has broadly construed the term “jurisdiction,” explaining: Where a judge does not clearly lack all subject-matter jurisdiction, he does not clearly lack all jurisdiction, and “the same principle … It is well settled in this state that acts of a de facto judge are valid, regardless of whether he was properly appointed or qualified or not. Id. (quoting Crocker v.

Frazier v. Garrison

980 F.2d 1514 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 14, 1993

In particular, the Court's opinion emphasized that the correct statistical measure for discriminatory impact purposes was the ratio of skilled noncannery workers to the "the pool of qualified job applicants" or the "qualified … Although facial neutrality at the bottom line cannot immunize an agency or employer from proved acts of discrimination against an individual or groups of individuals, we cannot infer discrimination from statistics that by

S & H Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission

672 F.2d 426 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 5, 1982

The Act clearly distinguishes between proceedings at the agency level and proceedings on appeal; thus we decline to view the former as merely a continuation of the latter. 3 See 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (d)(3); compare 28 U.S.C. … Nor, in fact, does the standard require the Government to establish that its decision to litigate was based on a substantial probability of prevailing. Id. at 11, 1980 U.S.Code Cong. & Ad.News at 4990.

Washington Aluminum Company, Inc. And Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company v. Pittman Construction Company, Inc.

383 F.2d 798 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 18, 1967

However, the low bidder qualified his bid to the extent that a floor other than one made of aluminum would be supplied. NASA rejected the qualified bid and notified Pittman that its bid was accepted. … Washington contends that such a finding is clearly erroneous.

Fernandes v. Limmer

663 F.2d 619 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 11, 1981

Furthermore, the legislative immunity discussed in Lake Country Estates, supra, on which defendants strongly rely, applies only to immunity from damage awards. … Regardless of the legislative immunity which might be afforded the D/FW Board members, they are not immune from a § 1988 fee award in their official capacities as law enforcers.

Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Donzi Marine, Inc.

586 F.2d 377 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 14, 1978

In that respect, the circumstances relating to the standing question in this case are very clearly distinguishable from those in the cited cases arising under the FCMHSA. … The question arose because the FCMHSA incorporated by reference the hearing procedures established in the LHWCA.