Case law

James E. Dougherty v. Continental Oil Company, Truman Arnold Distributing Co., Inc., Genico Distributors, Inc., and Reed Distributing Co.

579 F.2d 954 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 11, 1978

He did not, however, clearly inform the jury what his finding was with respect to geographical market. … The jury could evaluate the challenged restraints only in relationship to a clearly defined market.

Florida Fruit Canners, Inc. v. Walker

90 F.2d 753 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 19, 1937

Since the charge must rest upon a finding of a breach of contract, the burden of establishing that breach rested upon appellee. … The charges of $457.25, denominated as improper charges, do not seem to be questioned by appellants, except on the general question of jurisdiction, and it clearly ap *760 pears that L.

S-1, a Minor, by and Through His Mother and Next Friend, P-1 v. Ralph D. Turlington, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Commissioner of Education, State of Florida, Department of Education, Defendants

635 F.2d 342 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 26, 1981

The children in this suit are clearly handicapped within the meaning of both section 504 and the EHA. … under this subchapter in any fiscal year, a State shall demonstrate to the Commissioner that the following conditions are met: (5) The State has established ...

Gonzales v. H.E. Butt Grocery Co.

226 F. App'x 342 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 14, 2007

On appeal, Gonzales only asserts that Cabrera could not be entitled to qualified immunity because she is a privately employed nurse assigned to a jail. … It did not apply qualified immunity analysis to this claim. Consequently, his argument fails. D.

In re Grand Jury Subpoena for Attorney Representing Criminal Reyes-Requena

926 F.2d 1423 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 6, 1991

DeGeurin and Intervenor requested an in camera, ex parte hearing to establish the existence and nature of their attorney/client relationship. … We review the district court's findings of fact under the clearly erroneous rule. Fed.RXiv.P. 52(a) (findings of fact by the district court will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous).

Huang v. Harris County

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 22, 2001

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … The officers have established their entitlement to qualified immunity.

Russell L. Ketchum v. Gulf Oil Corporation, Travelers Insurance Company, Huthnance Drilling Company, and South State Insurance Company v. Dresser Industries, Inc.

798 F.2d 159 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 25, 1986

(stating that Sec. 905(a) "immunizes a compensation-paying employer from third party claims for contribution"); Lopez v. … The holding of a panel of this court must comport with prior panel decisions, until changed by this court acting en banc, or unless the Supreme Court either clearly holds or teaches to the contrary.

Randy Lynn Woolls v. O.L. McCotter Director, Texas Department of Corrections

798 F.2d 695 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 14, 1986

Although not clearly raised in his petition as a separate ground for relief, we will nevertheless review the appellant’s apparent assertion that use by the Texas Department of Corrections of sodium thiopental violates his … Witt, the Supreme Court also definitively established the degree of deference that a federal habeas court must pay to a state trial court’s determination that a juror should be excluded for cause.

Shelton v. Shelly

306 F. App'x 60 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 5, 2009

PER CURIAM:* This is an interlocutory appeal from the district court’s denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … The district court applied the proper standard in evaluating Defendants’ qualified immunity claim, asking first whether “plaintiff’s allegations, if true, established a constitutional violation,”

Frank v. Eunice

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 15, 2000

We review a claim of qualified immunity by asking first, whether the plaintiff has asserted the violation of a “clearly established constitutional right.” Siegert v. … In evaluating a claim of illegal arrest, “the qualified immunity determination turns on whether a reasonable officer could have believed the arrest to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information

Missouri Pacific Railroad Company v. Clyde Austin

292 F.2d 415 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 28, 1961

Mellon, D.C.N.Y.1927, 21 F.2d 562 . 7 On the issue of Austin's 50% interest, the Railroad has not met the burden of F.R.Civ.P. 52(a), 28 U.S.C.A., of demonstrating that the Trial Court's finding was clearly erroneous. 8 8 … the paper as a business record exhibit to establish the fact that these words were spoken by Flicks in 1953.

Alexander v. Taft

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 10, 2025

We need not accept allegations clearly disproven by photographic evidence incorporated in the complaint. See Kokesh v. … qualified mental health care.”

Shell Offshore Inc. v. Babbitt

238 F.3d 622 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 12, 2001

Prior to 1993, MMS (the sub-agency of Interior responsible for administering the OCS leases) accepted tariffs that were filed with FERC in determining whether a lessee qualified for an … Interior argued that FERC’s jurisdiction had not been clearly established and that if FERC did not have jurisdiction, then FERC could not establish the appropriate rate and “approve” the tariff within the meaning of §

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.

480 F.3d 724 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 1, 2007

Another point of confusion is that DuPont argues that the jury was “clearly wrong” in its verdict. … Although the jury’s determination of the backpay period was not clearly erroneous, the district court’s award of frontpay was an abuse of discretion.

Calbillo v. Cavender Oldsmobile, Inc.

288 F.3d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 25, 2002

Negligence To reco ver under a negligence cause of action, Calbillo must establish that Allied owed a legal duty to him, and then, that Allied breached the duty and Calbillo suffered damages proximately caused … As we observed in Willis, however, t he Texas high court also stated that “the only court of last resort in any American jurisdiction to clearly consider the issue has held that no tort duty to use reasonable care should

McAdams v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

198 F.2d 54 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 24, 1952

The cases relied upon by the petitioners and heretofore cited and many others establish the rule that “Taxpayers on a cash basis * * * have no right to a deduction until they make payment”, 2 Mertens Law of Federal Income … The qualifying clause in Section 43, 26 U.S.C.A. § 43 , “unless in order to clearly reflect the income the deductions or credits should be taken as of a different period” “was not intended to upset the well understood and

United States v. Richard Anthony Cain

587 F.2d 678 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 9, 1979

United States, 415 U.S. 449 , 94 S.Ct. 1185 , 39 L.Ed.2d 501 (1974), and the district court’s determination of the question can be set aside only if found to be clearly erroneous. See United States v. … This time span hardly qualifies as ‘immediately’ after the accident as that term is used in Rule 803(1), particularly in view-of the commentary on that Rule contained in the Advisory Committee Notes.

H. I. Stahlman, Jr., General Partner, and Wife, Mrs. J. S. Stahlman, Limited Partner, D/B/A Stahlman Lumber Company, Ltd. v. National Lead Company

318 F.2d 388 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 17, 1963

Under it, Baroid would “engage in the direct distribution” of its “products in all areas,” and would establish its “own channels of distribution.” … The most that can be said is that the oral agreements and the map gave the Lumber Company a qualified exclusive agency within the area embraced by the counties and parishes listed on the map.

Sellers v. Bell

94 F. 801 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 31, 1899

The general orders were adopted and established November 28, 1898, to take effect January 2, 1899. The forms in bankruptcy were not promulgated until December —, 1898. … The eleventh objection is not only not proved, but is clearly disproved by all the testimony in the case. It is to the effect that Bell had paid D. M.

Ayers v. City of Holly Spring

235 F. App'x 269 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 8, 2007

qualified immunity is applicable, then that decision is not immediately appealable....” Id., quoting Palmer v. Johnson, 193 F.3d 346, 351 (5th Cir. 1999). … In this case, the district court explained its decision in a written opinion, concluding that the evidence presented “clearly establishes fact issues” as to the