Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersca5

10,000+ results

1.40s

  • United States v. McGuire

    99 F.3d 671 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 11, 1996

    III CONCLUSION I find it particularly perverse to require a defendant either to object in the face of clearly established law to the contrary or face a stacked appellate … Klevenhagen, 5 F.3d 103, 108 (5th Cir.1993) (deciding that officials have qualified immunity against suits under § 1983 if their actions were reasonable in light of judicial precedent at the time of the offense). 5

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Harby

    94 F. 303 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 2, 1899

    Thus qualified, the rule requires the use of a degree of care much beyond ‘‘such as ordinarily prudent persons would exercise,” even the *308 utmost care that the most prudent persons would or could use. … discovering the peril of the child, used all the efforts in his power, and all the means at his command, consistent with the safety of those on the engine and train, to stop the train, and avoid the injury,” etc., *309 —Still clearly

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • In Re: DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc.

    870 F.3d 345 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 31, 2017

    deference on top of deference as the mandamus inquiry is not whether the district court abused its discretion, but whether it indisputably abused its discretion in finding that the following email exchange, among other conduct, clearly … The confirmation was not qualified, such as “Confirmed, but.” • The language Defendants tout as a limitation—“in order to allow this Court to select the next round of bellwether cases from a broader pool of cases that can

    Cited 46 timesPublished
  • Tomas Soliz v. Kenneth Plunkett, A/K/A "Guy Plunkett"

    615 F.2d 272 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 19, 1980

    burden then the burden shifted to the defendants to show that they were within one of the enumerated exceptions to the statutory definition of a farm labor contractor. 1 Accordingly, we need not consider whether Plunkett qualifies … under one of the exceptions because the burden of establishing the applicability of an exception lies with the defendants and because the evidence admitted prior to dismissal failed to establish the applicability of any

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Horton & Horton, Inc. v. Dyer

    428 F.2d 1131 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 13, 1970

    In his written opinion the District Judge has adequately set forth the facts which establish the basis of his findings after having had the opportunity to hear and observe the witnesses, appraise their credibility, and weigh … Questions of negligence, unseaworthiness and proximate cause are to be determined by the trier of fact and as such are subject to the clearly erroneous rule. Southern Stevedoring & Contracting Co. v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • National Labor Relations Board v. McCormick Steel Co., Division of Ducommon Metals & Supply Co.

    381 F.2d 88 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 27, 1967

    At the suggestion of the union organizer, the over-the-road truck drivers, including Springer, spread the word to the other warehouses, gathered information necessary to establish all warehouses as a single bargaining unit … He said that more than half of the fellows wouldn’t be qualified to take the — union tests, if the union came in. Therefore, if it did come in, we would be out of a job.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Nelson v. Stalder

    Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 29, 2002

    The evaluation of a qualified-immunity claim is a two-step process. "The first step is to determine whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a clearly established constitutional right." Colston v. … Nelson has failed to establish the violation of a clearly established constitutional right, and, therefore, the defendants are entitled to the qualified-immunity defense.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Young Conservatives v. Smatresk

    73 F.4th 304 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 10, 2023

    Preventing application of the unlawful rate imposed by § 54.051(d) is sufficient redress to establish standing. … Section 54.051(d) only imposes nonresident tuition for those who do not qualify for Texas residency (alien or citizen alike).

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Vela v. City of Houston

    Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 18, 2002

    See 29 U.S.C. 9 State and local government employers do not enjoy constitutional immunity from the FLSA’s requirements. … City regulations do not require a college degree to qualify as a paramedic or EMT.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Fudge v. City of Providence Fire Department

    766 F.2d 650 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 28, 1985

    Defendant suggests plaintiff failed to show he was qualified for admission and employment. Plaintiff showed he met the age requirement and he was under no significant physical or mental disability. … If the probability is sufficiently high that the disparity resulted from chance, the plaintiff must present additional evidence of disproportionate impact in order to establish a prima facie ease.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Ifeanyi Charles Anthony Okpalobi v. Mike Foster

    190 F.3d 337 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 17, 1999

    precedent. 81 In short, in Mazurek, the Supreme Court highlights specific types of evidence that are clearly insufficient to establish improper purpose; in Jane L, the Tenth Circuit affirms the obvious that, if the state … The district court's finding is not clearly erroneous.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Compagnia Maritima La Empresa, S.A. v. Rod Pickard

    320 F.2d 829 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 10, 1963

    equivalent of a general agent — the Claimant urges that none of the items in this large bill give rise to a maritime lien. 5 *832 In the face of the trial Judge’s findings which are sufficiently watertight to pass the amphibious clearly … While this does not alter the necessity that we view this on principles of maritime liens, for us to know the true facts is quite in keeping with the long established admiralty concept of the real party at interest, The SS

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Howard A. Kurzner and C. A. Kurzner v. United States

    413 F.2d 97 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 27, 1969

    However, in a seeming excess of caution, section 621.07 of the act made clear that the shareholder-professionals would not be immune from liability for their own conduct: Any officer, shareholder, agent or employee of a corporation … Since we have determined that the professional corporation involved here qualifies as a corporation under the pre-1965 regulations, 64 we need not decide whether the 1960 regulations are valid.

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Edwards v. Balch Springs, Texas

    70 F.4th 302 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 9, 2023

    Oliver moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, but the district court denied that motion, and this court affirmed.3 Likewise, the City moved to dismiss, arguing that Edwards had failed to state a … Likewise, the prior constitutional violations that Edwards relies on are too dissimilar and generalized to establish a pattern.

    Cited 38 timesPublished
  • Fitch v. Morrow

    199 F. App'x 347 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 30, 2006

    Morrow’s conduct, however, is shielded by qualified immunity in light of clearly established law. Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 210-11 (2001). … The clearly established law relied upon in applying the qualified immunity claim in this case is the “break in the causal chain” doctrine.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Goodrum v. Quarterman

    547 F.3d 249 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 22, 2008

    First, relief may be granted if the state court’s resolution of a petitioner’s claim on the merits was “contrary to” or an “unreasonable application of” clearly-established federal law as declared by the Supreme Court. 28 … Goodrum contends that the district court erred in holding the state court’s rejection of his speedy trial claim was not objectively unreasonable or contrary to clearly-established federal law.

    Cited 66 timesPublished
  • Placid Oil Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

    875 F.2d 487 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 16, 1989

    This operation is clearly within FERC’s definition of sidetracking set forth in Imperial Oil. … Under the bulk-of-costs rationale previously established by FERC the original spud date should control.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • McDermott International, Inc. v. Lloyds Underwriters of London

    944 F.2d 1199 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 3, 1991

    Seguros, a foreign-state-owned company, qualified as a foreign sovereign under the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (FSIA), 28 U.S.C. § 1603 . Seguros exercised its FSIA right to remove the case to federal court. … possible significance of that case’s forum selection clause was to waive removal rights. 931 F.2d at 15-16 ; see also Keaty, 503 F.2d at 956-57 (no waiver of removal rights where forum selection clause does not “on its face, clearly

    Cited 18 timesPublished
  • Central Power and Light Co. v. United States of America and Interstate Commerce Commission, State of Texas v. United States of America and Interstate Commerce Commission

    634 F.2d 137 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 15, 1980

    We find that the railroads' proposed rate does qualify for consideration as a capital incentive rate. … In this case, there has been an investigation of market dominance and jurisdiction is clearly established under § 10709(b) establishing judicial review over determinations of market dominance 32 We define "court-generated

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • McGinnis v. Johnson

    181 F.3d 686 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 9, 1999

    Accordingly, McGinnis fails to raise a genuine issue of fact that the trial court’s actions violated clearly established Equal Protection law. … The state court’s exclusion of hearsay evidence did not violate clearly established federal law.

    Cited 26 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.