Case law

Bailey v. Morales

190 F.3d 320 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 16, 1999

The Supreme Court has established that “mere speculation or conjecture” will not satisfy the burden; “rather, a governmental body seeking to sustain a restriction on commercial speech must demonstrate that the harms it … If the chiropractor pays the employer, then the conduct clearly violates § 38.12(a)(4).

Seoane v. Ortho Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

660 F.2d 146 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 2, 1981

POLITZ, Circuit Judge: This appeal presents the question of the constitutionality of the medical malpractice review panel procedure established by Louisiana Revised Statutes 40:1299.41-47. … The statutes clearly prescribe that the panel’s report constitutes no more than expert opinion evidence, 3 the use of which is not incompatible with the seventh amendment.

Gonzalez v. Ysleta Independent School Dist.

996 F.2d 745 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 20, 1993

While qualified immunity shields a city's officers from damages caused by their transgression of rights not "clearly established" at the time of their conduct, see, e.g., Anderson v. … It therefore may well be, as several district courts have held, that "to be 'deliberately indifferent' to rights requires that those rights be clearly established." Watson v. Sexton, 755 F.Supp. 583, 588 (S.D.N.Y.1991).

Nichols Ex Rel. Alcatel Network Systems Salaried Retirees Benefit Program v. Alcatel USA, Inc.

532 F.3d 364 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 20, 2008

“A preliminary injunction is an ‘extraordinary remedy’ and should only be granted if the plaintiffs have clearly carried the burden of persuasion on all four requirements.” Id. … In Musmeci, a panel of this Court held that grocery vouchers qualified as retirement income. 332 F.3d at 345.

Atlantic Coast Line R. v. Mitchell

157 F.2d 880 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 8, 1946

It establishes that the deceased could have, by the exercise of ordinary care, avoided the consequences of any negligence on the railroad’s part. … to general demurrer; and where such fact does not clearly appear from the petition, but is manifest from the evidence submitted on the trial by the plaintiff, a nonsuit is proper.”

Guillory v. Domtar Industries Inc.

95 F.3d 1320 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 30, 1996

Similarly, Deere asserts that the jury was clearly erroneous in failing to find Guillory contributorily negligent. … The testimony clearly provided that the fork, not the conveyor lay inches from Guillory immediately after the accident.

Compania Anonima Venezolano De Navegacion v. William H. Matthews

371 F.2d 971 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 2, 1967

The following facts, as found by the district court, were clearly established by the evidence: II. The libellant was engaged in the stowage of cargo in one of the hatches of said vessel. III. … A qualified expert on seamanship testified without contradiction that the method employed by the respondent herein on the date of libellant’s injury was unsafe. X. J. P. Florio & Co.

16 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1637, 12 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 11,048 Witt Campbell, Cross v. Gadsden County District School Board, Etc., Crossappellees

534 F.2d 650 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 2, 1976

Parallel reasoning establishes our authority to consider Campbell’s request for reasonable attorneys’ fees. II. … dismissal or demotion, no staff vacancy may be filled through recruitment of a person of a race, color, or national origin different from that of the individual dismissed or demoted, until each displaced staff member who is qualified

Ako Nose v. Attorney General of the United States

993 F.2d 75 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 12, 1993

Ill For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM. 1 .The VWPP provides: (a) Establishment of pilot program The Attorney General and the Secretary of State are authorized to establish a pilot program (hereinafter in this section referred … 787, 792 , 97 S.Ct. 1473, 1478 , 52 L.Ed.2d 50 (1977) ("Our cases 'have long recognized the power to expel or exclude aliens as a fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the Government's political departments largely immune

Willie R. Smith v. Everett E. Price, Chief of Police, Athens, Georgia, and City of Athens Personnel Board, City of Athens, Georgia

616 F.2d 1371 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 16, 1980

Thus, both the serious nature of Smith’s offenses and the fact that each offense was punishable by dismissal was clearly established at trial. … The rule concerning loitering in uniform clearly gave fair notice that Smith’s conduct was proscribed.

Mabee Petroleum Corp. v. United States

203 F.2d 872 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 17, 1953

Mabee, with only three qualifying shares to others. The *874 directors and officers were J. E. Mabee, President and Treasurer; L.. E. Mabee, Vice-President; John W. … of the Mabee Foundation was as follows: “To aid all Christian religious organizations, charitable organizations, preparatory, vocational and technical schools, institutions of higher learning, and scientific research; to establish

United States v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief

493 F.3d 469 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 4, 2006

“The [appellant] must clearly and specifically set forth facts sufficient to satisfy these Art. III standing requirements. … “It is well-established that one panel of our court will not overturn another absent an intervening precedent by our court sitting en banc or a Supreme Court precedent.” FDIC v.

National Labor Relations Board v. Bush Hog, Inc.

405 F.2d 755 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 26, 1968

Likewise, the Respondent’s charge that the Board was so partial and biased as to deny the Respondent a fair hearing has not been established. II. … Thus, the appeals to racial prejudice clearly violated section 8(a) (1). 3 . In a totally disconnected case, United States v.

Brenda Crawford, Etc. v. Edwin L. Pittman

708 F.2d 1028 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 8, 1983

Her parents claimed, however, that the school was also required to provide her with a qualified sign-language interpreter in class as part of her “appropriate public education.” … Our opinion explained: “[t]hat the [Act] creates enforceable rights to ‘special education and related services’ ... was clearly established in [Rowley].” Id. at 826 n. 2.

Worldwide Labor Support of Mississippi, Inc. v. United States

312 F.3d 712 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 15, 2002

As the majority opinion clearly explains, the process of determining whether a plan meets these requirements is complex, involving several distinct inquiries. … Thus, I believe the district court correctly found that Worldwide’s reimbursement plan did not qualify as “accountable plan” under the regulations.

Sadegh Shamloo v. Mississippi State Board of Trustees of Institutions of Higher Learning

620 F.2d 516 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 2, 1980

Colleges and universities are not immune from the requirements of the First Amendment. Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 , 92 S.Ct. 2338 , 33 L.Ed.2d 266 (1972). … This court clearly established the requirements for granting a preliminary injunction in Canal Authority of Florida v.

United States v. Jackson

636 F.3d 687 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 22, 2011

affairs and not for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact at trial—they are not testimonial.” … As the foregoing discussion makes clear, there is very little support for qualifying these ledgers as admissible business records.

Whaley v. Valdez

340 F. App'x 241 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 6, 2009

immunity is the legal conclusion that a reasonable official in the sheriff’s position would understand that her conduct violated Whaley’s clearly established rights. … Accordingly, Sheriff Valdez has not shown that the district court erred in determining that she was not entitled to qualified immunity.

Discover Property Cslty v. Blue Bell

73 F.4th 322 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 11, 2023

“Evidence is usually necessary in the coverage litigation to establish or refute an insurer’s duty to indemnify.” Id. … provision, nor is clearly excluded by the text of the policy.”

Hoover v. Johnson

193 F.3d 366 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 29, 1999

unreasonable application of, clearly yes, that’s what happened, we all agree established Federal law, as determined that that overt act is true and correct by the Supreme Court of the … See Daniel v. which might qualify as the overt act required State, 704 S.W.2d 952 (Tex. App. SSFort by the definition of the crime charged; the Worth 1986, no pet.) (citing Vasquez v.