Case law

Walker v. Stroman

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 9, 2022

The defendants moved to dismiss, asserting qualified immunity. Reyna additionally asserted absolute prosecutorial immunity. … their qualified immunity defense.’”

Teal Energy USA, Inc. v. GT, Inc.

369 F.3d 873 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 11, 2004

His deposition testimony, however, establishes that he and his family formed a Texas limited liability corporation and that this corporation is a shareholder of Teal Canada. … to do business in the state.”26 We further observed that there was nothing in the record “indicat[ing] that the corporation [wa]s similarly qualified to do business in New York.”27 This ambiguity

Stewart v. Usry

399 F.2d 50 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 29, 1968

Federal law, however, dictates whether such property interests qualify as a marital deduction. 7 The terminable interest rule: In order to exclude from the marital deduction a property interest which would otherwise qualify … That the heirs, upon the termination of the usufruct, may eventually enjoy the property in question is clearly contemplated by decedent’s bequest of the naked ownership to them and by the mandatory provisions of the Louisiana

Jackson v. Rawdon

235 F.2d 93 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 28, 1956

plaintiffs’ claims by developing that there were no administrative difficulties which had to be overcome in order to admit the plaintiffs to the Mansfield High School but only, as clearly shown by the testimony of R. … the refusal of the defendants to admit plaintiffs thereto on account of their race or color is unlawful; that it order the defendants forever restrained from refusing admission thereto to any of the plaintiffs shown to be qualified

United States v. Jenkins

487 F.3d 279 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 17, 2007

Ct. 1254 (2005), by relying on the PSR’s characterization of his prior offenses, and clearly erred by denying a sentence reduction for his minor role in the offense. … If the government 2 files an information to establish a defendant’s prior convictions, section 851(b) requires the sentencing court to inquire of the person with respect

United States v. Michael A. Palazzo and Rudolfo Castro Viagran

488 F.2d 942 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 23, 1974

Inasmuch as Viagran lacks standing to assert the constitutional immunities of his co-defendant, he has no basis upon which to invoke application of the Exclusionary Rule; his conviction is therefore affirmed. … However, the period of that possession clearly related to a time prior to his sale of the substance to Palazzo and Szpara.

Desmond Lewis v. City of Shreveport

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 18, 2019

violated a constitutional right; and second, whether the right was clearly established.” … To overcome a claim of qualified immunity in an excessive force case, the plaintiff “must show (1) an injury, (2) which resulted directly and only from a use of force that was clearly excessive, and (3) the excessiveness

Gonzales v. Reilley

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 9, 2023

Qualified Immunity We review a grant of summary judgment de novo. Hyatt v. Thomas, 843 F.3d 172, 176 (5th Cir. 2016). … To overcome the defendants’ assertion of qualified immunity, Gonzales must show they violated his clearly established Eighth Amendment rights. See Easter v. Powell, 467 F.3d 459, 462–63 (5th Cir. 2006).

Professional Ass'n of College Educators v. El Paso County Community College District

730 F.2d 258 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 20, 1984

The Supreme Court clearly articulated this proposition in Mt. Healthy City Board of Education v. … Tilendis, 398 F.2d 287, 290 (7th Cir.1968), the Seventh Circuit rejected a claim of absolute immunity for a school superintendent, saying, "To hold defendants absolutely immune from this type of suit would frustrate the very

Herbert Welcome v. Frank Blackburn, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary

793 F.2d 672 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 3, 1986

The jury was clearly advised that, if so disposed, it could find Welcome both sane and not guilty of murder in the first degree by concluding that he had not formed the requisite intent. … Welcome did not allege or establish either ground of error.

Cristoval Silva-Trevino v. Eric Holder, Jr.

742 F.3d 197 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 31, 2014

Rather, we consider only the means by which judges may determine whether a given conviction qualifies. … of the procedure for determining whether a particular conviction qualifies . . . .”

Jay Nottingham v. Joel Richardson

499 F. App'x 368 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 4, 2012

immunity, and failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. … It finally adopted the MJ’s finding that Lacey, Davis, and Lacy were entitled to qualified immunity. It did not address the MJ’s denial of appointment of counsel.

Barrett v. Atlantic Richfield Co.

95 F.3d 375 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 19, 1996

Indeed, the record suggests that Plaintiffs engaged in dilatory conduct clearly violative of the district court's orders. … Schroeder is not qualified to testify concerning the correlation, if any, between chromosomal damage to cotton rats and the alleged exposure in human beings. Dr.

United States v. Lewis Davis Michel, Robert Joseph Belmares, John Handy Jones, Daniel Stewart Henshaw and Ted Ray Hines

588 F.2d 986 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 2, 1979

Once it has been established that a conspiracy exists and that a particular defendant was clearly connected to the conspiring group or acted in a manner which unmistakably forwarded the conspiracy, then only slight additional … Government witnesses, who were themselves participants in the venture, clearly established the existence of an ongoing conspiracy to import marijuana, which employed many persons.

United States v. Frank Ragano

476 F.2d 410 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 9, 1973

United States, 306 F.2d 398 (5th Cir.), does not necessarily render his every conclusion immune from challenge. Experts “ought not to [be] asked or allowed to state their conclusions on the *417 whole case.” … “[I]n considering the sufficiency of the evidence we do not determine whether it establishes guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, but only whether the evidence would permit the triers of fact to find the defendants guilty beyond

United States v. Rogelio Benitez

822 F.3d 807 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 9, 2016

However, a defendant is not eligible for a reduction under § 3582(c)(2) if a qualifying amendment “does not have the effect of lowering the defendant’s applicable guideline range.” § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B); see also § 1B1.10, cmt … “A court abuses its discretion when the court makes an error of law or bases its decision on a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence.

In Re: Orso

283 F.3d 686 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 27, 2000

The fact findings of the bankruptcy judge, affirmed by the district court, are to be credited by this court unless clearly erroneous. … Our Young decision is very clearly distinguishable from the present case. Walden v.

Beaird-Poulan, Inc. v. Department of Highways, State of Louisiana, Claude S. Brinegar, and Secretaryof Transportation

497 F.2d 54 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 21, 1974

It dealt, very clearly, with an authorization that federal funds might be contributed toward the relocation costs of public utilities. … Powers The department has all of the rights, powers, and immunities inci *58 dent to corporations.

James C. Cathey and Bette Cathey v. The Dow Chemical Company Medical Care Program

907 F.2d 554 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 3, 1990

That being so, they argue, the evidence establishes that the nursing services at issue here were not primarily'—or predominantly—custodial. … Having the benefit of prior judicial review, however, we will not upset the district court’s factual determinations unless they are clearly erroneous. Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a); accord Offutt, 735 F.2d at 949. III.

Grosman v. Union Trust Co.

228 F. 610 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 4, 1916

But both these elementary -principles are subordinate to and qualified by the doctrine that neither by comity nor by the will of contracting parties .can the public policy of a country be set at naught.” … The embodying of the two provisions in the same, statute we think clearly manifests a legislative purpose to forbid a married woman becomii^ a surety for an obligation on which .her husband is a principal.