Case law

Jackson Muni Airport v. Harkins

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 10, 2023

The order noted that because legislative privilege is qualified, the Legislators must produce a privilege log before any assertions can be assessed. … Byrd, 521 U.S. 811 (1997), the Legislators contend that the alleged injury is “the sort of institutional injury which the Supreme Court has held insufficient to establish standing for Members of Congress.”

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.

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.

Salty Brine 1, Limited v. United States

761 F.3d 484 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 31, 2014

At the end of the policy year, the profit (approximately 85% of the premium from the BPP, less a management fee) would be placed into the already established separate asset accounts. … We cannot say that the district court clearly erred in making any of its findings.

Michael Patrick Moore v. Gary L. Johnson, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division

225 F.3d 495 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 23, 2000

Because this is a question of law, the district court could have issued a writ of habeas corpus only if Texas’s review procedures are “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law … Moore claims that in considering the question of venue change on direct appeal, the Court of Criminal Appeals employed a standard that is contrary to clearly established federal law.

Arguelles-Olivares v. Mukasey

526 F.3d 171 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 22, 2008

Kansas conviction was a crime of violence within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 16 (b), specifically, whether “intentionally causing physical contact with another person with a deadly weapon in a rude, insulting or angry manner clearly … See, e.g., James, 464 F.3d at 508 & n. 16 ("In determining whether an offense qualifies as an aggravated felony under the INA, we employ a categorical approach and look 'at the statute under which the alien was convicted

Marla Ross v. Midwest Communications, Inc., D/B/A Wcco Television, Andy Greenspan and Al Austin

870 F.2d 271 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 27, 1989

By contrast, the bright-line rules contended for by WCCO either establish independent limitations upon the state’s ability to define the scope of the “newsworthiness” defense, or go beyond that defense to establish protection … Yet these facts were clearly of “legitimate public concern.” The Ross brief itself effectively concedes as much.

Bank of Louisiana v. Aetna U.S. Healthcare Inc. Aetna Life Insurance Company

468 F.3d 237 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 18, 2006

exceptions, ERISA “shall supersede any and all State laws insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to any employee benefit plan .... ” The Supreme Court has “observed repeatedly that this broadly worded provision is ‘clearly … The parties do not dispute that this qualifies as an ERISA plan. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (1) (defining employee welfare benefit plans subject to ERISA). 2 .

Capital Films Corporation v. Charles Fries Productions, Inc. And American Broadcasting Company

628 F.2d 387 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 15, 1980

Rule 56 clearly requires that the party opposing summary judgment be given notice of a motion for that relief and be allowed 10 days within which to submit affidavits. … -Dallas 1953, no writ history), the Court held that, where “secondary meaning” is established, “no other person may use the name or similar combination of words without clearly indicating that his business, goods, or services

Goodwin v. Collins

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 7, 2024

“However, a good-faith assertion of qualified immunity alters the usual summary judgment burden of proof, shifting it to the plaintiff to show that the defense is not available.” … Without more, Goodwin fails to establish that the risk of harm was substantial. See Luna v. Davis, 59 F.4th 713, 715, 717-18 (5th Cir. 2023).

United States v. Orellana

405 F.3d 360 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 6, 2005

In Flores, we found that an alien’s receipt of such temporary benefits as protection from removal and authorization to seek employment did not render him immune to prosecution under section 922(g)(5)(A) when he had entered … Reedy, 304 F.3d 358, 368 n.13 (5th Cir. 2002) (“Despite its status as a tool of last resort, [the rule of lenity] has a long and established history in the Supreme Court and this circuit.

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.

Taylor Freeland v. Tarrant County, Texas, e

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 3, 2019

In response, Tarrant County and Waybourn filed a motion to dismiss based primarily on qualified-immunity grounds. … “The grant of a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity similarly is reviewed de novo.” Id.

Tenny v. Dretke

416 F.3d 404 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 7, 2005

Washington.8 In making this inquiry we “ask whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law was objectively unreasonable,” and we are mindful that “an unreasonable application … as ‘clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.’”); Schaetzle, 343 F.3d at 443-44. 12 Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687-88. 13 Id. at 689 (internal

Dallas Independent School District v. Woody Ex Rel. K.W.

865 F.3d 303 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 27, 2017

The District also argues that there are other statutory reasons Woody cannot qualify for reimbursement. … [i]f the State establishes a timeframe within which the evaluation must be conducted, within that timeframe[.]” 34 C.F.R. § 300.301(c)(1).

65 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 804, 40 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1467 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Manville Sales Corporation, Charles Mitte v. Manville Sales Corporation

27 F.3d 1089 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 6, 1994

Under the case law of this circuit, therefore, the instruction was improper. 33 Manville argues that the jury charge required Mitte to show that he was "clearly better qualified" than Hinton or Lichten and thus the charge … A showing that a discharged employee was clearly better qualified than younger retained employees is merely one of many ways that a plaintiff can show that a reduction-in-force was a mere pretext for age discrimination.

Henderson v. Billingslea

149 F.3d 1177 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 1, 1998

These defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim because Henderson has not demonstrated a “clearly established constitutional right” to have complaints investigated. Harlow v.

Canada Hockey v. Texas A&M Univ

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 8, 2021

Cannon and Stephenson moved to dismiss the claims for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) and on qualified immunity grounds. … State Sovereign Immunity State sovereign immunity divests federal courts of jurisdiction over states and their agencies and instrumentalities, unless the state consents to suit or Congress has clearly and

Texas Education Agency v. EDUC

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 7, 2018

Yet the weighted-student model violates that canon, rendering superfluous the carefully-wrought waiver process established by Congress. … The Court then “ask[s] whether such a state official would clearly understand” the IDEA’s requirements. Id.

Eugene Loyd Webb v. Dr. George Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections

362 F.2d 105 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 31, 1966

These facts alone preclude our overruling the District Court as “clearly erroneous.” … The facts here established clearly show that there has been no violation of the principles set forth in White v. State of Maryland, 373 U.S. 59 , 83 S.Ct. 1050 , 10 L.Ed.2d 193 ; Hamilton v.