Case law

Johnson v. Uncle Ben's, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 20, 1992

UBI argued at trial and on appeal that workers qualified to hold jobs in the lower zones of a job category were not necessarily qualified to hold higher jobs in the same category. … This cannot suffice to establish a prima facie case. Wards Cove, 109 S.Ct. at 2124-25.

Kvue, Inc. v. Moore

709 F.2d 922 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 18, 1983

III. 26 The existence of a "case" in the constitutional sense being established, we consider its merits. … The FCC's explication of the public interest requirement has established standards that broadcasters must meet to renew or secure a license.

Lyndon Property Insurance v. Duke Levy & Associates, LLC

475 F.3d 268 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 3, 2007

Breach The district court found that Lyndon failed to establish a breach of a duty to the District by DLA. … The Supreme Court of Mississippi in Mound Bayou clearly stated that the engineer must “adequately” inspect a project before a release of funds is proper. 499 So. 2d at 1359 (upholding the lower court’s finding in favor

United States v. Sid-Mars Restaurant & Lounge, Inc.

644 F.3d 270 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 17, 2011

The Court is mindful that although it is rare that a federal court will enjoin and stay a state court proceeding, the government’s motion fits squarely within clearly established law on when such a stay is appropriate.” … The form of the remedy did not qualify the right. It rested upon the Fifth Amendment. Statutory recognition was not necessaxy. A promise to pay was not necessary.

Ely Silverman v. The State Bar of Texas

405 F.2d 410 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 11, 1968

This principle was made clear by Chief Justice Marshall when he stated for the Court that any state law, however clearly within a State’s acknowledged power, which interferes with or is contrary to federal law, must yield … I, § 8, Clause 18, pursuant to which the Patent Office and its specialized bar have been established.”

Marvin Waddleton, III v. Bernadette Rodriguez, et

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

Ongudu and Salinas denied the allegations and asserted qualified and Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit. … defense against a § 1983 claim, the plaintiff has the burden of establishing a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the allegedly wrongful conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. 6

Sambrano v. United Airlines

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 9, 2026

First, United’s grant of a medical accommodation does not establish as a matter of law that any employee had a qualifying disability. … Conclusion When a district court certifies a class, we review that decision only for abuse of discretion.50 And a decision survives that deferential standard “unless it is arbitrary or clearly unreasonable.”51 The

In Re United States of America, United States of America v. Ray Cowan and Jack Jacobsen, Wayne O. Woodruff, Special Prosecutors

524 F.2d 504 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 8, 1975

In that case the Chief Executive asserted the unqualified privilege of an immunity from judicial process under all circumstances as a derivative of the Doctrine of Separation of Powers. … The considerations which prompted Judge Hill to overrule the motion to dismiss are, in our judgment, legally insufficient to overcome the presumption of the government’s good faith and establish its betrayal of the public

United States v. David Anderton

679 F.2d 1199 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 9, 1982

We reversed and remanded his conviction because the trial court failed clearly to advise the jury on the issue of entrapment. … Thus the Pittman conversations did not qualify for the 801(d)(2)(E) exceptions, being hearsay, and were not technically admissible at trial.

Roberson v. Alltel Information Services

373 F.3d 647 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 30, 2004

Roberson disagreed with his placement, believing that he was qualified for a higher classification than Business Analyst II, but nonetheless accepted Alltel’s offer. … The record clearly indicates that Alltel’s reduction-in-force was based on objective criteria.

United States v. Dennis Lee Ullrich

580 F.2d 765 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 20, 1978

Hangar picked out the defendant from the lineup, but she qualified her choice by indicating that she was not certain. 11 After *773 full voir dire examination by the court and counsel, Ms. Hangar left the courtroom. … These cases clearly do not apply in the context of this arrest. Here, there has been no showing that Ullrich protested the impoundment at the time.

Vernon Cowan v. Joe Corley, Sheriff of Montgomery County, Texas

814 F.2d 223 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 13, 1987

A number identifying the wrecker as a member of the Association will be clearly displayed on each wrecker. 6. … Members of storage facilities not qualifying for approved storage yard may contact [sic], in writing, with an approved owner. 28.

16 Collier bankr.cas.2d 1447, Bankr. L. Rep. P 71,794 Braniff Airways, Inc. Debtor and Debtor-In-Possession, and the Official Unsecured Creditors' Committee of Braniff Airways, Inc. v. Exxon Company, U.S.A.

814 F.2d 1030 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 20, 1987

The money transferred was given as payment for a product--clearly an arms-length business transaction. … First, assuming the funds qualify as property that can be subject to a bailment, the money in this case was not given in trust. It was given as payment for fuel.

Taylor ex rel. Taylor v. St. Clair

685 F.2d 982 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 16, 1982

STATUTORY SCHEME The State of Mississippi participates in Medicaid, a joint federal-state program providing medical assistance to qualified recipients. Title 42 U.S.C. § 1396 . … A qualified provider must abide by these regulations as a condition of participation in the Medicaid Program.

Hull v. Quitman County Board of Education

1 F.3d 1450 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 2, 1993

Finally, appellants have not demonstrated that the district court’s finding of financial necessity to close Crowder was clearly erroneous. … For these reasons, we conclude that plaintiff-intervenors did not establish a substantial likelihood that they could prevail on the merits of their case.

32 Fair empl.prac.cas. 228, 30 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 33,070 R. D. Thaggard v. The City of Jackson, Mississippi, a Municipal Corporation, Defendants- Ronald N. Ashley v. City of Jackson, R. D. Thaggard v. City of Jackson

687 F.2d 66 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 19, 1982

Jackson Police Department further provided, among other things, that the City of Jackson Police Department establish separate promotion eligibility lists for white and black employees and that it make future promotions, subject … mechanism for interpreting the true meaning of the decrees, its position, as stated and argued, is akin to a mortar attack on the validity of the decrees themselves. 3 To permit this collateral challenge of the decrees "would clearly

Deering Milliken, Inc., Unity Plant v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission

630 F.2d 1094 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 19, 1980

Any equipment and/or technical measures used for this purpose must be approved for each particular use by a competent industrial hygienist or other technically qualified person. … The language of both regulations is clearly mandatory.

Bunker v. Dow Chemical

111 F.4th 683 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 7, 2024

Some indication in the EEOC charge that the TWC is to receive the charge is necessary. 2 This indication could appear, as clearly _____________________ 2 Some courts have characterized the necessary … But Vielma did not confront the issue of whether filing with the EEOC necessarily qualifies as filing with the TWC.

United States v. Lulac, Gi Forum and Naacp, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellees v. State of Texas

793 F.2d 636 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 12, 1986

The Board, in February 1984, formally approved the use of the test and established the scores that would be necessary to pass. … The establishment of disparate impact, however, does not alone suffice to prove a violation of either Title VII or Title VI.

Charles Edwin Roberts, Sr. v. Williams-Mcwilliams Co., Inc. v. Gibson Welding and Construction Co., Exxon Corporation

648 F.2d 255 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 16, 1981

Citing our well-established test as enunciated in Offshore Co. v. … The facts clearly support District Court’s ruling.