Case law

Sharon Grandstaff, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of James C. Grandstaff and Kay Lajune Grandstaff, as Next Friend of Jo Cheryl Grandstaff, a Minor, Cross-Appellants v. The City of Borger, Texas, Cross-Appellees. Sharon Grandstaff, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of James C. Grandstaff v. The City of Borger, Texas

767 F.2d 161 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 5, 1985

immunity. … The answer to that argument is that the reckless use of deadly force was not within their discretionary authority and that the wanton and oppressive taking of a life violated clearly established law. See Harlow v.

Marceaux v. Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government

614 F. App'x 705 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 8, 2015

After a hear- ing, the district court issued four separate summary judgments dismissing the six plaintiffs’ claims on the first prong of qualified immunity, 6 concluding that no plaintiff had made out an actual violation … in light of clearly established law at the time of the violation.

Rony Paz Calix v. Loretta Lynch

784 F.3d 1000 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 28, 2015

Paz Calix made his argument clearly, and cited one of the few cases relevant to the question at issue. A thin argument perhaps, but when the authority itself is thin, that may be sufficient. … No. 13-60764 were established prior to the case under consideration.

Clifton Williams v. William Stephens, Director

761 F.3d 561 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 1, 2014

AEDPA requires the petitioner to prove that the adjudication by the state court “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the … The focus of the “unreasonable application” inquiry is on whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law was objectively unreasonable. Williams v.

Davis v. Board of School Commissioners

600 F.2d 470 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 6, 1979

their individual actions on the merits: (1) the court improperly based the dismissals on consideration of the School Board’s motives; (2) purposeful racial discrimination was proved; (3) the court’s findings of fact were clearly … Even though their individual claims may be found to be meritless on remand, they have succeeded in establishing that the defendants exercised unlawful promotion practices against the group of applicants in general with regard

Estate of L. C. Hunt, Deceased v. United States

309 F.2d 146 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 27, 1962

These facts are that the decedent died on April 22, 1953, and his wife subsequently qualified as executrix. … United States, supra, clearly rules the case before us.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

834 F.3d 562 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 22, 2016

“Although the movant bears the burden of establishing its right to intervene, Rule 24 is to be liberally construed.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). … The Association has satisfied its “minimal” burden to establish that its interest is not adequately represented. Edwards v. City of Houston, 78 F.3d 983, 1005 (5th Cir. 1996).

Doran v. Compton

645 F.2d 440 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 20, 1981

Although the quoted language clearly establishes that section 4 of article 5.82 supersedes the tolling provisions of article 5535 for causes of action that accrue during the effective life of section 4, it provides no guidance … Dallas Society, however, was not covered by liability insurance since, in 1969, it was protected by the Texas Charitable Immunity Doctrine.

Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Texas, Inc. v. Commissioner

328 F.3d 770 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 16, 2003

According to Appellee, the language used does not clearly indicate the recoveries are estimated amounts of anticipated future recoveries and, therefore, does not even fulfill the purpose of the regulation as Blue Cross … Additionally, Appellee asserts that the standard of review for this issue is clearly erroneous because it is an issue of fact.

Rewis v. United States

369 F.2d 595 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 5, 1966

Shepherd answered and said, “I qualify the answer, yes, by just one question, and that is, one supposition. … It seems clear that with *602 out these qualifying assumptions in the Government’s hypothetical case, Dr.

Witherspoon v. White

111 F.3d 399 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 2, 1997

Thus, when the district court fails to clearly indicate that a judgment disposing of less than all parties was entered pursuant to Rule 54(b), the judgment is not considered final. … Additionally, the magistrate judge found that the federal defendants were entitled to qualified immunity due to Witherspoon's inability to allege a constitutional deprivation 4 The district court stated that it granted the

United States v. Victor Hernandez-Montes

831 F.3d 284 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 25, 2016

Hernandez-Montes urges that his conviction of attempted second-degree murder does not qualify as an enumerated offense under Section 2L1.2 cmt. n.1(B)(iii). … Martinez-Flores, 720 F.3d 293, 300–01 (5th Cir. 2013) (finding error where the district court “did not clearly state” whether it would have imposed the same sentence absent the erroneous guidelines range despite its reference

Jamerson v. The Board Of Trustees Of The University Of Alabama

662 F.2d 320 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 23, 1981

His age and experience in teaching, along with his educational background, clearly made him more qualified than plaintiff Jamerson. 13 James W. Goode was 46 years of age at the time he was employed. … The exhibit does not establish a nonretention because of race. The totality of the evidence clearly supported a finding of a nondiscriminatory reason for nonretention, whichever criteria was used.

Alice M. Oldham v. Richard S. Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant

660 F.2d 1078 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 12, 1981

Since claimant last enjoyed insured status on December 31, 1975, it was necessary for her to establish that she became disabled on or before that date in order for her to qualify for disability benefits. 2 On June 8, 1977 … Gordon, a qualified reviewing physician, that was supported by the evidence, and in rejecting the conclusory statement of Dr. Harris, a treating physician, that was contrary to the evidence.

United States Ex Rel. Vaughn v. United Biologics, L.L.C.

903 F.3d 472 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 7, 2018

Univ., 171 F.3d 279, 290–94 (5th Cir. 1999) (holding that Eleventh Amendment immunity was not waived on this basis). … But this principle of interpretation, known as the “Series-Qualifier Canon,” applies only when context clearly establishes that it is intended. Reading Law at 147–51.

Rost v. United States

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

The district court correctly found that Enelre qualifies as a foreign trust. … As the district court explained, “Rost’s argument is based on the faulty premise that the IRS established a ‘rule’ that a Stiftung always qualifies as a ‘foreign trust.’” Rost, 2021 WL 5190875, at *8.

22 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1579, 20 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 30,175 Birdie Mae Davis, United States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor, Edwin Foster and James E. Buskey, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellants v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County

600 F.2d 470 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 6, 1979

their individual actions on the merits: (1) the court improperly based the dismissals on consideration of the School Board's motives; (2) purposeful racial discrimination was proved; (3) the court's findings of fact were clearly … Even though their individual claims may be found to be meritless on remand, they have succeeded in establishing that the defendants exercised unlawful promotion practices against the group of applicants in general with regard

United States v. Thomas Ralph Farese

612 F.2d 1376 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 17, 1980

probable cause, this case clearly falls with those cases in which probable cause was upheld. … Farese would testify before a Grand Jury or State Attorney under subpoena without a grant of immunity to him and your Affiant feels that immunizing Thomas R.

C.F. Dahlberg & Co., Inc., D/B/A St. Mary Galvanizing Corp., Plaintiff v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.

836 F.2d 915 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 3, 1988

Mary] clearly show delivery of the supplies to the contractors and the amount owed for them. The invoices identify for which leases these supplies were intended. … Mary Iron Works did not support the proposition that to qualify for a § 9:4861 lien the work had to be performed on the lease site. 3 . Gleason is distinguishable from the present case.

United States v. Robert P. Popovich, Jack W. Moncrief, and the University of Texas System

820 F.2d 134 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 26, 1987

Circuit precedent clearly establishes that “laches is unavailable as a defense against the United States in enforcing a public right.” … A party is entitled to appear in person or by or with counsel or other duly qualified representative in an agency proceeding.