Case law

Jason Weathers v. Ruth Cano

392 F. App'x 339 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 26, 2010

The district court alternatively found that, if she had been involved, Cano was entitled to qualified immunity. The district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of Cano. … Moreover, if Cano had been involved, she was entitled to qualified immunity. Weathers did not show that she violated his constitutional rights. See Lytle v. Bexar County, Tex., 560 F.3d 404, 410 (5th Cir. 2009).

Gary E. Weisel v. Singapore Joint Venture, Inc., a Florida Corporation

602 F.2d 1185 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 19, 1979

Since the FLSA is limited to employees, an employer can avoid the minimum wage requirement by establishing that a particular person is an independent contractor rather than an employee. … Weisel’s valet services clearly fit within the standard set forth in. Mednick . 16 .

Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden

63 F.4th 366 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 23, 2023

This language made a qualifying change in “duties or responsibilities” dependent on an individual employee’s position. … The President, as head of the federal executive workforce, has authority to establish the same immunization requirement that many private employers imposed to ensure workplace safety and prevent workplace disruptions

Lanasse v. Travelers Insurance

450 F.2d 580 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 19, 1971

They are not clearly erroneous, and we accept them. … The District Court’s findings establish that the pallets were not in a position to interfere with the operations. . See Continental Oil Co. v. London Steam Ship Owners’ Mut. Ins.

Rebecca Jo Reser v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

112 F.3d 1258 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 12, 1997

But we do not find this choice problematical — we conclude that the Price approach is clearly the better. … When we consider Reser’s actual knowledge and the four relevant factors, we are convinced that the Tax Court’s conclusion was clearly erroneous.

Lucio v. Lumpkin

987 F.3d 451 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 9, 2021

We first explain the law clearly established in Crane. … Then we describe the clearly established law as articulated by the Supreme Court.

Redditt v. Mississippi Extended Care Centers, Inc.

718 F.2d 1381 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 10, 1983

The court’s brief finding fails to clearly reflect a choice between conflicting testimony. … Although he indicated that a plaintiff seeking to represent a class need not prove a prima facie case or facts entitling the class to relief, he qualified this statement as follows: But that does not excuse the plaintiff

In Re Luhr Brothers Inc.

325 F.3d 681 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 2, 2003

The trial court placed responsibility on both vessels for failing to establish communication. … It was the failure of all vessels to establish prompt communication that foreclosed this opportunity."

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in Its Corporate Capacity as Liquidator of Lake Austin National Bank v. Lake Country National Bank

873 F.2d 79 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 14, 1989

To qualify, the notice of dishonoring must be specific, precise, unequivocal, and certain, *82 and it must be delivered to a responsible person at the depositary bank. … As noted, the evidence establishes that Lake Country initiated no action to give LANB notice that the check would be returned unpaid.

Kern River Gas Transmission Co. v. The Coastal Corporation

899 F.2d 1458 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 15, 1990

Rather, it extended similar environmental approval to any applicant otherwise qualified to build a pipeline within the approved corridor. … These expressions were clearly separate from the idea of where to construct a transmitting tower.

United States v. Eugene Thompson

735 F.3d 291 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 12, 2013

It is true that Haynes establishes only that no Supreme Court decision “clearly established” the rule advanced by Thompson. … Because AEDPA’s 20 limitation of “clearly established” Supreme Court precedent does not apply to our review on direct appeal, we could adopt the Haynes panel’s reasoning in the instant case.

Shannon Kohler v. Pat Englade

396 F. App'x 158 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 29, 2010

We remanded this single claim, pretermitting the issue of qualified immunity because Johnson had 1 We have previously stated the facts in some detail, and by reference, incorporate that discussion. … The district court found that, due to the abject deficiency of the affidavit, Johnson was not entitled to qualified immunity.

Serna v. City of San Antonio

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 9, 2001

immunity, and certain damages issues … Moreover, Serna testified that he had never taken a qualifying examination or other steps to seek a promotion.

McLaughlin v. Lindemann

853 F.2d 1307 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 9, 1988

Moreover, the proof established no criminal conduct or fraud on the part of either Lindemann or Shanbaum. … It was the district court’s prerogative to accept the evaluations of the Secretary’s appraisers, and the district court’s findings, unless clearly erroneous, are binding on this Court.

Neal v. Puckett

286 F.3d 230 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 15, 2002

Thus, that court’s disposition of this issue was substantive and therefore qualifies as a decision “on the merits.” In this case, the “clearly established Federal law” is the Supreme Court’s decision in Strickland v. … As the Supreme Court noted recently, It is past question that the rule set forth in Strickland qualifies as “clearly estab *236 lished Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.”

American Airlines, Inc. v. Herman

176 F.3d 283 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 18, 1999

certainly administrative tribunals ought to be and, indeed, they generally have been immune from interlocutory review of procedural rulings.”), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 877 (1973). … Standard Oil of California, 449 U.S. 232 (1980), the Supreme Court reworked its rigid test for judicial review of agency decisions established in Abbott Laboratories, replacing it with a new “finality” analysis for determining

Scott Panetti v. William Stephens, Director

727 F.3d 398 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 21, 2013

established Supreme Court precedent — specifically, Ford v. … Cain, 283 F.3d 657 (5th Cir. 2002) (holding that unless the Supreme Court has itself “clearly established” that a new rule is retroactive under Teague, the new rule “c[an]not be considered with regard to [§ 2254(d)] petitions

United States Department of Education v. Gerhardt (In Re Gerhardt)

348 F.3d 89 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 23, 2003

Under the second prong of the test, the district court correctly concluded that Gerhardt has not established persistent undue hardship entitling him to discharge his student loans. … Under the facts presented by Gerhardt, it is difficult to imagine a professional orchestra musician who would not qualify for an undue hardship discharge.

Warner v. Florida Bank & Trust Co.

160 F.2d 766 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 10, 1947

The successor trustee filed an answer refusing to qualify as trustee and refusing to defend the trust. … The argument that the remaindermen, upon the refusal of the successor trustee to qualify, were called upon to defend and establish the validity of the trust, hence were entitled to have their attorney’s fees assessed against

Lightbourn v. County of El Paso

118 F.3d 421 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 11, 1997

In addition, Rule 23(b)(2) clearly applies to this case because the Secretary has "acted or refused to act" on grounds generally applicable to the class. … Thus, to establish a violation of Title II, the plaintiffs here must demonstrate: (1) that they are qualified individuals within the meaning of the Act; (2) that they are being excluded