Case law

United States v. Claudia Atehortua-Castro

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 8, 2014

Gibson, failed to file a notice of appeal, file an Anders brief, and secure a written pre- agreement from the government requesting immunity. … Thus, Appellants’ argument does not demonstrate that the district court clearly erred. See also Johnson v.

Byram v. United States

705 F.2d 1418 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 31, 1983

In order to establish discrimination in the operation of a seniority system, it is necessary to prove discriminatory intent. Id.; Swint, 456 U.S. at 275-277 , 102 S.Ct. at 1783-1784 , 72 L.Ed.2d at 72-73 . … In establishing those thresholds, Congress clearly expressed its intent that sales of otherwise qualified capital assets held for six to nine months be accorded capital gains treatment.

Peter J. Brennan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. National Hotel Company and Menger Hotel, Jointly and Severally

476 F.2d 17 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 22, 1973

a “good faith” defense to any suit brought under the FLSA. § 10 of the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947, 29 U.S.C. § 259 , immunizes employees from suits brought under the FLSA if the act complained of was done in good faith … This ruling is plainly erroneous because the regulation in question, 29 C.F.R. § 531.59 (1972), clearly advises the employer that he can take credit only for the amount of tips actually received by the employee and that he

Travis Paul v. Petroleum Equipment Tools Co.

708 F.2d 168 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 27, 1983

We find that these findings of fact are not clearly erroneous. … See Checklist on Jobs Qualifying for White-Collar Exemption, 6 Lab. Rel. Rep. (BNA) 92 :531-32 (1976). .

United States v. Nicholas Bachynsky

934 F.2d 1349 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 25, 1991

Sec. 371 . 4 Houston physician Bachynsky and his associates established phony weight loss and smoking cessation clinics throughout the United States. Dr. … Rule 11(c)(1). 6 14 Clearly, the district court informed Dr.

Lester Stacy v. The Aetna Casualty & Surety Company

484 F.2d 289 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 8, 1973

The evidence in the present case fails to establish that Purnell had relied on Aetna’s inspection services to Stacy’s detriment. … This case is clearly distinguishable from Bufkin v. Grisham, 157 Miss. 746 , 128 So. 563 (1930), a Mississippi decision cited as an illustration of subpart (a).

L & F Homes and Devel, L.L.C. v. City of Gu

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 8, 2013

Roundhill was, therefore, not qualified. … The district court held that the claim is barred by sovereign immunity. We agree.

Verona Deloach Downs v. J. M. Huber Corporation

580 F.2d 794 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 21, 1978

The court clearly intended by its holding to establish negligence as the standard for future trials of land occupier cases. … Southcrest Baptist Church, 399 S.W.2d 530 (Tex.1966) (charitable immunity). Had the Texas court intended only prospective application for Parker we believe this intention would have been made explicit.

Neal v. Puckett

239 F.3d 683 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 18, 2001

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 established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.”

Singh v. City of Greenville, MS

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 16, 2026

Because the Singhs do not point to any evidence of unequal treatment, they fail to satisfy even the less stringent standard established by Villareal and Gonzalez. 1 The district court’s conclusion that the Singhs’ claim fails … Moreover, even if the district court reached the incorrect conclusion about the strength of the plaintiffs’ comparator evidence, qualified immunity _____________________ 1 Nor is their argument

Total E & P USA, Inc. v. Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Corp.

719 F.3d 424 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 20, 2013

The footnote clearly stipulates that the lease’s provisions for payment of royalties are superseded by the DWRRA if the lease is eligible for royalty suspension, thus qualifying the lessee’s contractual duty to make royalty … “Even if the language utilized is clear and unambiguous, parol evidence is admissible to establish that the language does not embody the essence of the agreement to which there was mutual assent.”

United States v. Wilson

322 F.3d 353 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 18, 2003

District Court’s Factual Finding That the Government Sent a Formal Request for Legal Assistance to the Bahamian Government Wilson argues that the district court clearly erred in finding that the Government had established … The court found that Lanyi qualified as a person familiar with OIA’s routine correspondence practices, and that her testimony was therefore sufficient to establish the letter was sent according to routine practices.

B., Inc. v. Miller Brewing Company

663 F.2d 545 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 10, 1981

In order to establish that an in-state defendant has been fraudulently joined, the removing party must show either that there is no possibility that the plaintiff would be able to establish a cause of action against the in-state … This code section clearly states that “diversity” actions are removable ”... only if none of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the state in which such action is brought.” 4 .

United States v. Seale

600 F.3d 473 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 18, 2010

Insofar as it is relevant in this case, we disagree. 6 No case demonstrates the *483 contrast between the two standards more clearly than Dickerson v. … The prosecutor’s statement clearly violated the Supreme Court’s holding in Doyle v.

R. M. Allen, Trustee of the Estate of Marvin P. Lovorn, Bankrupt v. R. A. Watkins

234 F.2d 925 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 23, 1956

On November 30, 1954, Lovorn was adjudicated a bankrupt and on December 11th, Allen was appointed Trustee, qualifying on December 14 th. … We find nothing in the record indicating that the findings of the Referee and District Court as to the absence of fraud were clearly erroneous.

United States v. Jack F. Garber

471 F.2d 212 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 26, 1972

These comments are not made for the purpose of criticizing or weakening the long-established rule in this Circuit that, when a defendant takes the witness stand to testify in his own defense, he puts his character in issue … As we stated in Bendelow ; “[W]e are unwilling to sponsor for this Circuit a rule which would immunize a criminal defendant from attacks on his credibility by proof of prior convictions so long as he is careful to repeat

Jack E. Alderman v. Sam Austin, Warden, Georgia State Prison

695 F.2d 124 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 10, 1983

We now have groups that are qualified to serve as jurors but unqualified to serve as foreperson. … These questions, as I see it, are pure questions of fact, subject to Rule 52’s clearly erroneous standard.

Fontenot Ex Rel. Fontenot v. Dual Drilling Co.

179 F.3d 969 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 19, 1999

There is no person or entity which meets this definition in this case, and there is clearly no vessel of any kind involved, much less one upon which any injury occurred. … Section 933 establishes procedures by which third-party claims are to be prosecuted in the context of a predicate LHWCA claim.

United States v. David K. Morris

532 F.2d 436 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 27, 1976

As such, they were clearly “gambling offenses ... in violation of the laws of the State” and were thus punishable under 18 U.S.C. § 1952 (a)(3). … Defense counsel was given access to all relevant information, including F.B.I. reports, a bill of particulars, plea agreements, and immunity grants, thus ensuring the appellant the constitutional guarantees of a fair trial

United States v. Upton Pearson, Jr. And Edward Johnson, Jr., United States of America v. Edward Johnson, Jr.

448 F.2d 1207 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 4, 1971

Clearly such a claim cannot be established by proof of the *1214 Government’s striking of Negroes in any one case. In Swain v. … It clearly indicated its views, but we note Mr.