Case law

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,007 Willie Bell, Jr. v. Health-Mor, Inc.

549 F.2d 342 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 24, 1977

established and applied by the vendors) and that the person actually submits to a sales demonstration of a vacuum cleaner. … The payment of the $10 fee was dependent upon a qualified customer’s submitting to a sales demonstration.

Travis RIPLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee

67 F.3d 552 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 30, 1995

To prove disability resulting from pain, an individual must establish a medically determinable impairment that is capable of producing disabling pain. 16 Once a medical impairment is established, the subjective complaints … What the record does not clearly establish is the effect Ripley’s condition had on his ability to work. 27 The only evidence regarding Ripley’s ability to work came from Ripley’s own testimony. 28 Therefore, on remand, we

Melissa MIGIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. PEARLE VISION, INC., Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee

135 F.3d 1041 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 10, 1998

The court credited MeQuay’s testimony that Mig-is was qualified for a senior programmer position. … The calculation of attorney’s fees involves a well-established process.

Piambino v. Bailey

610 F.2d 1306 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 6, 1980

An examination of the Bestline Business Opportunity Booklet, coupled with the Applications, Qualification Forms, and Agreements required to be executed by Direct Distributors, clearly established that the efforts of Bestline … He was to make the restitutionary payments on a pro rata basis according to a schedule established in the Instructions.

United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Ricardo Angel Castillo, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee

430 F.3d 230 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 3, 2005

In this memorandum, Castillo argued that the district court should depart downward from the sentencing range established by the Guidelines for two reasons. … She also told the court that “I can’t say to the court that he qualifies.”

Curtis P. BALDWIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee

667 F.2d 458 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 8, 1982

This language clearly suggests that a plaintiff may institute suit based on the ADEA in either state or federal court. … If the action of the district court in granting summary judgment was based only upon appellant’s failure to establish the third above stated element of a prima facie case of age discrimination, as he insists that it was,

Masinter v. Tenneco Oil Co.

867 F.2d 892 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 16, 1989

Based on the evidence presented, we conclude that this finding is clearly erroneous. … Calculation of future wage loss should have been predicated on the only assumption supported by the record, i.e. that Masinter was qualified to secure employment paying $24,000 per year.

United States v. Jones

136 F.4th 272 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 29, 2025

B (“[T]he Commission was . . . informed by existing legislation, including the congressionally established criteria for the statutory safety valve at 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) . . . .”); see also Pulsifer v. … Wilkie, 588 U.S. 58(2019), did not clearly overrule Stinson v.

United States v. Carl Murphy, Jr.

703 F.2d 1335 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 4, 1983

For this reason, any imagined error clearly does not reach the level of plain error. … He maintains that the government’s proof failed to establish that acceptance of the social security and VA checks furthered his scheme to defraud the government.

Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, El Paso District Joint Board, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Farah Manufacturing Company, Inc.

491 F.2d 595 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 21, 1974

Clearly, the evil to be avoided in intra-plant unit designations is the arbitrary grouping of employees whose interests are indistinguishable from those of their fellow employees, since establishing such artificial entities … In each of these cases, certain characteristics which set cutting employees apart from their co-workers were clearly evident.

James P. Mitchell v. Sunshine Department Stores, Inc.

292 F.2d 645 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 26, 1961

Walling, 324 U.S. 490 , 65 S.Ct. 807 , 89 L.Ed. 1095 , where it was held that the central office and warehouse of a chain store system do not qualify for the "retail establishment" exemption. … for the "retail establishment" exemption contained in Section 13(a) (2).

Ian Smalley v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General

354 F.3d 332 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 15, 2003

The IJ next addressed whether Smalley qualified for an adjustment of status. … In addition, because of the great toll that drugs have exacted from our society, Smalley’s agreement to conceal drug money was clearly “contrary to the accepted rules of morality.” The .

United States v. Oscar S. Wyatt, Jr., Coastal States Gas Corp., Intervenor-Appellee

637 F.2d 293 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 17, 1981

Powell, 379 U.S. 48 , 85 S.Ct. 248 , 13 L.Ed.2d 112 (1964), established four judicial limitations for the enforcement of a § 7602 summons. Id. at 57-58, 85 S.Ct. at 254 . … In the present case, the IRS elected to establish the Powell prong of relevancy by the testimony of the audit case manager. The record clearly establishes that a prima facie showing of relevancy was made.

Joseph Rudolph Hamilton v. Armstrong Cork Company

371 F.2d 139 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 27, 1967

The superior knowledge principle adverted to in Quinnelly was simply another way of stating the established Florida rule in cases of this kind. … It did not qualify Peninsular, Hall or Hickory House . We hold that the facts made out a jury question as to whether the defendant was negligent under the circumstances of this case.

Sawyer v. Die

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 30, 2024

No. 22-10447 Odal, M.D., and Pepper Bradberry, a nurse, “refused to treat him, ignored his complaints, intentionally treated him incorrectly, or engaged in any simi- lar conduct that would clearly … Moreover, Sawyer does not allege facts that demonstrate that the district court erred in con- cluding that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because he had not demonstrated that they violated a clearly established

Lowery v. Mills

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 31, 2025

Lowery’s complaint suffices to establish standing. … Harris, 118 F.3d 359, 366 (5th Cir. 1997), so whatever rude state- ments were exchanged about Lowery behind his back also do not qualify as adverse employment actions.

Federal Trade Commission v. Dixie Finance Company, Inc. And Transouth Financial Corporation

695 F.2d 926 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 20, 1983

After a review of the arguments and the memoranda, the Court concludes that the information the Commission seeks is not immunized from investigation by the “business of insurance” exemption of the McCarran Act. … Applying the analysis established by the Fifth Circuit to the instant case leads us to conclude that the relationship involved between Dixie Finance and TransSouth and its customers which the Commission seeks to investigate

Eldon D. Brinley and Mary Alice Brinley v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

782 F.2d 1326 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 20, 1986

In those instances, then, where a contribution is not made to a charity or is made to a charity for a particular individual, clearly there is that lack of “indefiniteness” in connection with the contribution that will result … However, the courts must be mindful that the law that they establish in one case may be applied in many other cases.

Addie Holmes v. Atlantic Sounding Company, Inc. Weeks Marine Inc. Abc Insurance Co. Xyz Insurance Co., Addie Holmes v. Atlantic Sounding Company, Inc. Abc Insurance Co., Inc.

437 F.3d 441 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 19, 2006

The magistrate judge concluded that (1) the BT-213 is not a vessel for purposes of the Jones Act, (2) Holmes could not establish any possibility of recovery under the Jones Act, and (3) as diversity jurisdiction existed, … employed the foregoing language to confirm that there still exist limits on a potential plaintiff's seaman status under the Jones Act. 34 As Stewart 's definition of "vessel" applies equally to the Jones Act and the LHWCA, § 3 clearly

United States v. Jorge Antonio Zimeri-Safie

585 F.2d 1318 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 11, 1978

Proof that Beechum possessed two credit cards which were issued to patrons on his mail route was clearly prejudicial. … These other acts, making it appear that Zimeri had taken steps to acquire false identification, were clearly prejudicial.