Case law

Jay Y. Crum v. American Airlines, Inc.

946 F.2d 423 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 12, 1991

As Manning was an appeal after a full bench trial, the most appropriate issue was whether the district court’s decision that the pharmaceutical company had terminated the plaintiff for cause was clearly erroneous. … Ger-aghty’s complaint establishes two points. First, Geraghty alleges that she was not offered the publisher’s position.

Trinity Industries, Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission

206 F.3d 539 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 23, 2000

the existence of a hazardous atmosphere at the time of the inspection and therefore that the lining operation did not qualify for the subpart(c) exception. … We find that the knowledge issue was properly preserved for our review in this case where the Commission was clearly aware of the knowledge issue and where the knowledge issue constituted a fundamental element of the Secretary

Commissioner v. Webre Steib Co.

140 F.2d 768 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 15, 1944

Section 907, being a part of a statute in derogation of the sovereign immunity from suit, must be strictly construed. 6 The tax period and the period before and after the tax are carefully defined by the statute, and must … This evidence clearly was sufficient to dissolve the pre *772 sumption, 9 and since there was no other proof to support any refund, the claim should have been disallowed in its entirety.

Jenkins v. Tahmahkera

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 19, 2025

immunity. … Official defendants in suits like these already are generally protected by qualified immunity.

Gayle BULLARD Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. OMI GEORGIA, INC., and Kawasaki Oshema, Individually, Defendants-Appellees

640 F.2d 632 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 23, 1981

In support of their position, appellants submitted affidavits of 20 present and former employees of Omi, including appellants’ own affidavits, establishing as factual contentions that appellants were discharged and replaced … The language of Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c) clearly indicates that summary judgment is inappropriate whenever a genuine issue of material fact exists.

David Collie v. Hugo Barron

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 30, 2018

clearly established law.” … Under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, Collie must show the law was clearly established, and to do this he was required to produce cases where the qualified immunity defense has failed under similar circumstances

Boos v. AT&T, INC.

643 F.3d 127 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 3, 2011

Concession is structured so that an OOR retiree may only receive reimbursement for qualified telephone expenses. … Concession does not provide OOR retirees with a fixed income; rather, they are reimbursed for qualified telephone expenses.

Juan E. Vela, Phillip E. Daley Tiera Angelle Leger Richard Wayne Medeiros Clint Hendrix, - - and Calvin Thames, Intervenor Calvin Thames, Intervenor Plaintiffs v. The City of Houston, - - Philip E Daley Tiera Angelle Leger Richard Wayne Medeiros Clint Hendrix v. City of Houston

276 F.3d 659 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 14, 2001

City regulations do not require a college degree to qualify as a paramedic or EMT. … Nothing in the record suggests that this finding was clearly erroneous.

Chanel Hall v. Scott Dixon

497 F. App'x 366 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 1, 2012

Qualified immunity protects government officials from money damages unless a plaintiff shows “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time … “A Government official’s conduct violates clearly established law when, at the time of the challenged conduct, the contours of a right are sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what

Department of Texas, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States v. Texas Lottery Commission

760 F.3d 427 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 28, 2014

However, in 1980, the Texas Constitution was amended to establish an exception to this prohibition for charitable bingo. Id. § 47(b). … The Texas Lottery Commission was originally a defendant, but it was dismissed based on sovereign immunity. . We agree with the panel majority’s conclusion that the Charities have standing to sue.

James A. COLEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, Virgil Weary, Intervenor-Appellant, v. BRANIFF AIRWAYS, INC., Defendant-Appellee

664 F.2d 1282 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 4, 1982

In this Circuit, to establish a prima facie case where the suit is based on the employees’ discharge, the employees are required to show: (1) They are members of a protected minority; (2) They were qualified for the jobs … When merchandise was not clearly identified as belonging to Braniff, both employees were reinstated. (8) Two black employees were terminated for theft (after termination of employees in the present action) when caught with

Kelvin Wells v. State Atty Gen of Louisiana

469 F. App'x 308 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 22, 2012

Because the defense of qualified immunity was raised, there is no liability unless Wells has shown that “taking the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the officer’s alleged conduct violated a constitutional … Wells has failed to allege facts supporting a claim that the defendants violated clearly established constitutional rights to be free of racial discrimination in housing. See Lytle, 560 F.3d at 410.

United States v. O. C. Lee Robin, Jr.

419 F.2d 381 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 3, 1969

It is well settled that “* * * the registrant bears the burden of clearly establishing his right to the ministerial exemption and the board has no affirmative duty to ascertain whether or not the registrant qualifies for … The facts of this ease do not take it out of *383 the realm of well established precedents, 3 and the record clearly discloses that appellant failed to discharge his burden of establishing a prima facie case for a ministerial

The Taggart Corporation v. Life and Health Benefits Administration, Inc.

617 F.2d 1208 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 30, 1980

HILL, Circuit Judge: The Security Multiple Employers Trust [SMET], appellee, provides group insurance to employers too small to qualify for group rates on their own. … On the other hand, Congress has elsewhere clearly distinguished between “health plans” and “health insurance.” I.R.C. §§ 105(a), 105(e). As with pension plans, see H.R.Rep.

Yu Zhao v. Gonzales

404 F.3d 295 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 16, 2005

One might argue that the statute authorizes such a regulatory delegation of discretion and that the underlying activity should therefore be immune from our scrutiny, but such a construction would belie Congress’s conspicuous … In her mystifying analysis, the IJ infers from Zhao’s infrequent public Falun Gong participation that he no longer qualifies for protection under the statute. This reasoning is deeply flawed.

Charles H. Blanchard, D/B/A Blanchard Construction Co. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, Charles H. Blanchard, D/B/A Blanchard Construction Co. v. United States of America

341 F.2d 351 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 12, 1965

, to "remove the sovereign immunity of the United States from suits in tort. * *" Richards v. … Uppermost in the mind of Congress when it waived this immunity were the ordinary common law torts.

Mcgonigal v. Gearhart Industries

851 F.2d 774 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 8, 1988

The jury finding removes any protection available under military contractor immunity. … The law of the case in McGonigal I establishes the propriety of application of res ipsa loquitur in this case.

Miller v. Riser

84 F. App'x 417 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 23, 2003

Klevenhagen, 5 F.3d 103, 108 (5th Cir. 1993)(qualified immunity). … This claim does not relate to the appeal from the district court’s denial of qualified immunity, and therefore we do not have jurisdiction to review this claim. Hatfield v.

United States v. Sarah Joyce King Cooper, as Executrices of the Will of M.A. Cooper, Deceased

277 F.2d 857 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 24, 1960

ITall, Jr., a qualified hydroelectric engineer. … Here, moreover, it is plain that the witness Hall was not qualified as an expert on the issue of probability of use within the reasonably near future. He was qualified as a hydraulic engineer.

Clinton Young v. William Stephens, Director

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 30, 2015

Analyzing § (d)(1), a state court’s decision is contrary to clearly established federal law if: “(1) the state court ‘applies a rule that contradicts the governing law’ announced in Supreme Court cases, or (2) the state court … Instead AEDPA requires us to consider whether it is debatable that the state court decision was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.