Case law

Redel's Inc. v. General Electric Company

498 F.2d 95 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 31, 1974

The purposes of the addenda were clearly set forth in Sections 3(a) and 3(b): “3. … The prospective application of a general release to bar private antitrust actions arising from subsequent violations is clearly against public policy.

Lucky Tunes 3, L.L.C. v. Larry Smith

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 1, 2020

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials sued in their individual capacity “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Because Lucky Tunes has failed to plead a violation of any constitutional right, much less a clearly established one, the officers are entitled to qualified immunity. See Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818.

Tarrance Whitlock v. Director Tdcj-Cid

459 F. App'x 375 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 25, 2012

In Whitlock’s case, because the defendants asserted qualified immunity, Whitlock bore the burden of overcoming that defense. See Gates v. … In sum, Whitlock’s general allegations regarding issues four and five are insufficient to defeat the defense of qualified immunity. See Ontiveros, 564 F.3d at 382; Little, 37 F.3d at 1075.

Zastrow v. Houston Auto Imports Greenway Ltd.

789 F.3d 553 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 12, 2015

Witness retaliation is a separate crime covered by 18 U.S.C. § 1513, the violation of which also qualifies as a predicate act under RICO. 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). … Defendants’ purported misconduct, however, clearly does not fall under this statute (and Zastrow does not argue that it does).

The H. Schumacher Oil Works, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company

239 F.2d 836 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 8, 1957

the evidence is such that the jury could merely speculate about the existence of a fire it would not be sufficient, and it has been held that the mere showing of the emission of smoke, steam, or heat is not sufficient to establish … To hold otherwise and to accept defendants’ theory the jury would have had to disregard entirely much of Wamble's testimony and to accept the surmising of the technically less qualified Goble.

United States v. Florita Bell Griffin, Terrence Bernard Roberts, Joe Lee Walker

324 F.3d 330 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 10, 2003

Griffin argues that Martin’s testimony was improper because he was never qualified as an expert witness under Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, and because the government did not establish a factual foundation for … The record does not indicate that there was a separate hearing detailing whether Mitchell qualifies for restitution as a “proximate victim” and what amount he should receive if he does qualify.

Enterprise International, Inc. v. Corporacion Estatal Petrolera Ecuatoriana

762 F.2d 464 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 8, 1985

necessary prerequisites.” 27 In reviewing the findings of fact and conclusions of law required to be made when the district judge grants or denies a preliminary injunction, 28 we must uphold its findings of fact unless they are clearly … This testimony falls far short of establishing that Enterprise International does not have an adequate remedy at law in Ecuador.

John Russell Webster, Cross-Appellants v. The City of Houston, Cross-Appellee

735 F.2d 838 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 9, 1984

Testimony at trial indicated that the “Joyvies” case involved the use of a throw down gun, so it would clearly have been relevant. … In that case, the Supreme Court squarely held that a municipality is immune from punitive damages in a § 1983 claim.

Reyna De La Paz Rivas-Martinez v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

997 F.2d 1143 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 18, 1993

Consequently, the IJ’s error clearly affected the BIA’s decision, as the IJ’s approach determined the nature of the evidence adduced. … Proving the Requisite Persecution Although Elias-Zacarias clearly sets forth the elements that an alien must prove to qualify for asylum in a forced conscription case, the Court leaves largely unanswered the related questions

Grand Isle Shipyard, Inc. v. Seacor Marine, LLC

543 F.3d 256 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 22, 2008

Based on Demette , it is apparent that the SEA HORSE IV does not qualify as an OCSLA situs within the meaning of § 1333(a)(1). 2 That is, the vessel does not qualify as either “the subsoil and seabed of the [OCS],” an “artificial … This case is thus clearly distinguishable from those decisions, and the district court erred in interpreting them as supporting OCSLA’s applicability in this case.

International Women's Day March Planning Committee v. City of San Antonio

619 F.3d 346 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 8, 2010

The court was also troubled that the appeals process established for the permit scheme did not clearly authorize challenges to the amount of fees imposed by the SAPD. … They protest that the 2008 ordinance and Procedure 214 do not clearly establish when barricades are necessary for a procession. They argue that the 2008 ordinance does not explain how cleanup costs should be assessed.

Texas Manufactured Housing Ass'n v. Nederland

101 F.3d 1095 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 26, 1996

Plaintiffs claimed that defendants' actions amounted to a constitutional tort as well as a denial, under the United States Constitution, of substantive due process, equal protection, just compensation, privileges and immunities … The evidence in this case does not establish this specific, key fact.

21 Employee Benefits Cas. 1762, Pens. Plan Guide (Cch) P 23937u R. Scott Nickel, as Plan Benefit Administrator of the Thrift Plan of Phillips Petroleum Company Thrift Plan of Phillips Petroleum Company, Plaintiffs-Counter v. Estate of Lurline Estes, Defendant-Cross Estate of Annie J. Layman, Defendant-Counter Claimant-Appellant, Clifford D. Estes Lisa C. Williams, Defendants-Cross Tom Fowler C.W. Fowler R.L. Layman Barbara Peeples, Defendants-Counter Claimants-Appellants

122 F.3d 294 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 28, 1997

Clearly, the plan says nothing about anyone disclaiming on behalf of the beneficiary or entitled beneficiary. … The quoted sentence clearly requires a beneficiary to sign and deliver a written disclaimer that also meets the Code's requirements for being tax qualified. 24 In addition, even if the Estes defendants could show that the

United States v. Ricardo "Ricky" Vela

673 F.2d 86 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 2, 1982

In today’s case, the prosecution’s demand and the surrounding circumstances known to Vela clearly apprised Vela of the manner in which the rule was being invoked. … Clearly, the notice-of-alibi procedure is not intended to serve the office of such a bill.

Preston v. Tenet Healthsystem Memorial Medical Center, Inc.

485 F.3d 804 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 25, 2007

A party’s residence alone does not establish domicile. Mas v. Perry, 489 F.2d 1396, 1399 (5th Cir.1974). We now turn to the evidence establishing intent, the second element of citizenship. b. … We do not find the district court’s findings of fact clearly erroneous. c.

Ryan Zimmerman v. Gary Cutler

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 20, 2016

“The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.” Id. at 1866 (quoting Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 739 (2002)). … The parties, like the district court, focus on the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis—whether it was “clearly established” in February 2012 that deploying a Taser to stop a person reasonably suspected of a misdemeanor

Byers v. City of Eunice

157 F. App'x 680 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 1, 2005

5 that then clearly established law”. … clearly established law.

United States v. Hare

150 F.3d 419 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 5, 1998

The district court did not clearly err by crediting this evidence. 5. … because the Government failed to establish a nexus between the firearm and the drug trafficking offense.

Guzman v. Stoudt

208 F. App'x 362 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 8, 2006

First, the court asks whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Id. at 322-23. … If so, the court must then decide whether the defendant’s conduct was objectively reasonable in light of the clearly established law at the time of the incident. Id. at 323.

Catherine Foster, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. James L. Sparks, Etc.

506 F.2d 805 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 20, 1975

Swain then, established a 10-15% tolerance in race cases. … The Court concluded that these disparities did not establish a prima facie case. • 65 . See Thiel v. Southern Pacific Co., supra; Labat v.