Case law

Rite Research Improves the Environment, Inc. v. Douglas M. Costle, Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Etc.

650 F.2d 1312 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 26, 1981

The conference report mentions several communities *1318 that might be likely to qualify for the modification provision. … Court granted certiorari on October 10, 1980, oral argument was held on February 24, 1981, and a decision probably will be issued shortly, the order granting certiorari, - U.S. -, 101 S.Ct. 314 , 66 L.Ed.2d 145 (1980), clearly

Perez v. Zahara

332 F. App'x 214 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 8, 2009

In this case, it is: if a jury accepted Perez’s version of the genuinely disputed fact issue—that is, Defendants terminated him because of his religious beliefs—then Defendants would have violated Perez’s clearly established … Consequently, we AFFIRM the district court’s denial of qualified immunity. AFFIRMED. 2

United States v. Marietta Joyce Chappell, Charles Edward Gibson, Robert Nathaniel Mitchem, and Rita Ann Shephard

6 F.3d 1095 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 1, 1993

Shephard contends that “detecting counterfeit checks” does not constitute a proper field of expertise and that, in any event, Humphrey’s training as a bank security officer did not qualify him as an expert. Under Fed. … Upward Departure Mitchem finally challenges the justification for and extent of the upward departure imposed by the district court. 27 Trial courts may impose sentences outside the range established by the guidelines in cases

American Trucking Association, Inc. v. United States of America and Interstate Commerce Commission, American Movers Conference v. Interstate Commerce Commission and the United States of America, C & H Transportation Co., Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America

642 F.2d 916 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 17, 1981

The Commission also has issued interim rules establishing procedures for applying for authority to transport government traffic under the new Act. … The applicant's compliance and fitness are clearly subject to challenge by a competitor in an adjudicatory proceeding. IV.

Mario Mijangos v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc., and Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor

948 F.2d 941 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 28, 1992

No party disputes this finding, which establishes the prima facie case of total and permanent disability. … The AU, however, clearly explained his reasons for not affording significant weight to the testimony of these persons. The AU noted that Mr.

Opelika Nursing Home, Inc. v. Elliott L. Richardson, Secretary of the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare

448 F.2d 658 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 16, 1971

[footnotes omitted] Whether expressed in terms of “good faith” or “legal certainty,” 7 the standard clearly favors those parties seeking to invoke the jurisdiction of a federal district court. … In this case the formal allegation is not reenforced or strengthened by other portions of the complaint; neither is it neutralized or weakened by qualifying or detracting allegations. In effect it stands alone.

Charupatanapong v. Univ of Houston

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 17, 2002

Clearly Established Right We are first faced with the question whether the genuine issues of fact found by the district court are material to whether the Appellee has alleged the violation of a clearly established … 6 Objective Reasonableness The second prong of the qualified immunity test is whether Appellants’ actions were objectively reasonable in light of clearly established law.

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.

United States v. Jodie Timothy Packer

70 F.3d 357 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 3, 1996

Section 3E1.1(b) establishes a three part test to determine whether a defendant has earned the additional point 14 to which defendant is entitled if he qualifies. 15 Mindful that the “sentencing judge is in a unique position … He obtained the false documents, rented the villa in which they lived in France, provided the necessary funding, and established a bank account in France.

United States v. Curtis Cluff

857 F.3d 292 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 18, 2017

In March 2015, Cluff moved to dismiss the indictment based on the doctrine of equitable immunity. … Assuming that the doctrine can apply to the government, to succeed Cluff must first establish that “the position of the party to be estopped is clearly inconsistent with its previous one; and [second,] that party must have

Trotti & Thompson v. Crawford

631 F.2d 1214 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 4, 1980

Both are sites carved out of a clearly covered situs-the navigable water. … But in this dynamic area it is safe to say, as the Ninth Circuit cautioned: "We do not decide whether an employee whose duties shifted every week, of every month, may ... qualify under the Act."

Gregory Willis v. Cleco Corporation

749 F.3d 314 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 8, 2014

To establish a prima fade case, a plaintiff must demonstrate that he, “(1) is a member of a protected group; (2) was qualified for the position at issue; (3) was discharged or suffered some adverse employment action by the … The district court determined that Willis had not established a prima facie case.

Payne v. Travenol Laboratories, Inc.

565 F.2d 895 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 6, 1978

This paragraph clearly fails to satisfy the requirement that an injunction “be specific in terms” and “describe in reasonable detail . the act or acts sought to be restrained . . . .” Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(d). … Here the named plaintiffs and each member of the class were qualified on the precise requirement which they seek to set aside.

Graef v. Chemical Leaman Corp

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 2, 1997

Arbitral awards are not immune from this general grant of discretion to the district courts. As the Supreme Court explained in Alexander v. … he burden of establishing that the arbitrator's findings were not trustworthy.

United States v. Fred Lacoy Smith and Woodrow Wilson Wallace, Jr.

550 F.2d 277 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 8, 1977

In the instant case, Smith offered no evidence tending to establish standing under any of the three categories set out in Brown . … It is engaged in no way in any type of political endeavor, and I want you to understand that very clearly.

Thomasville Automotive Parts, Inc. v. United States

609 F.2d 1136 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 15, 1980

Instead, § 6416(b)(3)(B) contains a provision, not discussed by the taxpayer in its brief, that clearly denies to the taxpayer the right to obtain a refund as for an overpayment of the tax paid. … We conclude that the trial court correctly determined that the taxpayer could not recover for the tax it paid without qualifying under the registration provision of the statute since it did not come within the provision allowing

Pedro Gonzales v. Clifton W. Cassidy, Jr., John Richard Hayes, Iii, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellants

474 F.2d 67 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 15, 1973

Our first step, however, is to examine subdivisions (b) and (c) of Rule 23 in order to establish the proper context in which to make this inquiry. … First, as the' 1966 amendments to Rule 23 clearly illustrate, the purpose of a class action is to allow as few as one member of a class to prosecute an action for the benefit of the class if the requirements of 23(a) and

Wanda Bowling v. John Roach

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 29, 2020

“[A]bstention is appropriate unless state law clearly bars the interposition of the constitutional claims.” Moore, 442 U.S. at 425–26. … Finally, although Bowling devotes significant portions of her briefing to qualified immunity and the applicability of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, the 8  Case: 19-41003 Document

Hess Shipping Corp. v. SS Charles Lykes

417 F.2d 346 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 10, 1969

Magnifying these qualifiers the decision obliterates the two mandatory imperatives of Rule 16 — (1) moderate speed and (2) stopping engines. … Here the evidence clearly indicates that the Hess Voyager at all times knew the position of the Charles Lykes.

United States v. Leonard

61 F.3d 1181 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 14, 1995

Testimony under oath observed by the district court would qualify. United States v. Smith, 13 F.3d 860 (5th Cir. 1994), is not to the contrary. … Specifically, both insist that the evidence was insufficient to establish the element of knowledge or intent.