Case law

Jones v. Kyle

68 F.3d 471 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 25, 1995

Kyle filed an answer asserting qualified immunity and a motion for summary judgment. Relying on Heck v. Humphrey, 114 S. … He asked the court to grant partial summary judgment in his favor on the issue of qualified immunity. 2 A set-off is the amount of time that must expire before there is further review of the denial of parole

Troy Thoele v. Marc Hamlin

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 9, 2019

In addition, Thoele contends that the district court erred in concluding that clerk of court Hamlin was entitled to quasi-judicial immunity rather than qualified immunity. … Bd. of Educ., 748 F.2d 1077, 1083 (5th Cir. 1983) (“To establish a denial of procedural due process, a party must show substantial prejudice.”).

LaShip, L.L.C. v. Hayward Baker, Incorporat

680 F. App'x 317 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 1, 2017

The court in Bunge, however, did not address statutory immunity under LSA-R.S. 9:2771. … The district court concluded here that the contra non valentem doctrine was inapplicable because TPC failed to establish the “reasonableness of its inaction with respect to filing [a] lawsuit within the one year prescription

Kathy Dunagin v. The City of Oxford, Mississippi, the State of Mississippi, Intervenor-Appellee. Lamar Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Mississippi State Tax Commission

718 F.2d 738 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 31, 1983

, state liquor laws are not immune from constitutional scrutiny. … Should this finding be subject only to a clearly erroneous standard of review?

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Cross v. Louisiana National Bank, Cross

653 F.2d 927 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 14, 1981

All the outstanding capital stock of ICB (other than directors’ qualifying shares) was owned by The ICB Corporation (ICB Corporation). … The FDIC, in its brief on appeal, firmly agrees 1 with that characterization but goes on to argue that LNB failed to offer any evidence which could or did establish that section 4 was violated.

Houston Chronicle Publishing Co. v. City of League City

488 F.3d 613 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 30, 2007

The district court held both newspapers have standing because each demonstrated long-established practices of street-vendor sales in the City. USDC Opn. at *1. … “To qualify as a prevailing party ‘[a]ll that is required is that the plaintiff obtain the primary relief sought.’” Id. (quoting Marshall, 622 F.2d at 120).

United States v. Richard Lee Heinz

983 F.2d 609 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 10, 1993

Moreover, the government used a lawyer with whom Heinz had previously established an attorney-client trust. … Still, the DR 7-104(A)(1) argument was clearly presented to this Court.

Almeda Mall, Inc. v. Houston Lighting & Power Co.

615 F.2d 343 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 11, 1980

Competition clearly existed for the total retail market of entire municipalities, which could opt for service from Otter Tail or from the municipal system. … The record clearly indicates that HL & P is continuously regulated by the City. In 1959, the City prohibited HL & P from using residential demand meters.

John M. Ruch v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

718 F.2d 719 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 31, 1983

This is a finding of fact, and may not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. … standard, the burden of establishing clear error is not so heavy as in the normal ease.

Ketona Chemical Corporation v. Globe Indemnity Company

404 F.2d 181 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 7, 1969

Globe objects to this arrangement on the ground that Lloyds is an unauthorized insurer under the Alabama Unauthorized Insurer’s Act, Title 28, Alabama Code, Section 417(1) et seq., since it is not qualified to do business … This issue was included in the district court’s directed verdict in favor of defendant Globe, for the reason that the court felt that plaintiff had failed to establish that a demand had been made upon Globe with respect to

Doddy v. Oxy USA, Inc.

101 F.3d 448 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 17, 1996

. § 1452(b) clearly provides that, once a claim is removed under § 1452, then a decision to remand or not to remand may not be reviewed. … The Doddys do not challenge the court's determination that Cotton was not qualified to testify as an expert. See Daubert v.

United States v. Thomas

12 F.3d 1350 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 25, 1994

Because this finding is not clearly erroneous, we will uphold Maxwell’s sentence. … We review this finding using the clearly erroneous standard. United States v.

Maze v. Hargett

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 28, 1999

Qualified Immunity Next, we determine whether the prison officials are entitled to qualified immunity. … Defendant prison officials argue that the district court erred when it rejected their affirmative defense of qualified immunity because Maze failed to articulate a clearly established constitutional right.

Williams v. Cain

125 F.3d 269 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 17, 1997

Johnson, 110 F.3d 1098, 1108 (5th Cir.1997) (“If reasonable jurists could disagree, the state court decision on a mixed question of law and fact is not ‘an unreasonable application of federal law,’ and thus.the decision is immune … We cannot say, under the AEDPA’s deferential standard of review, that the state court’s conclusion “involved an unreasonable application of’ clearly estab *280 lished federal law.

United States v. Wright

496 F.3d 371 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 9, 2007

Offenses that do not qualify as part of a common scheme or plan may nonetheless qualify as part of the same course of conduct if they are sufficiently connected or related to each other as to warrant … The district court did not clearly err in including loss from the Tippie loan.

United States v. Team Finance

80 F.4th 571 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 31, 2023

Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020) (A district court abuses its discretion when it “bases its decision on an error of law or a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence.” (quoting United States v. … Adler also alleges an individualized harm from “being deprived of information that he is uniquely well-qualified to study and publicize in his academic work, and which information he can get nowhere else.”

Ali Boureslan v. Aramco, Arabian American Oil Company and Aramco Service Company

857 F.2d 1014 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 17, 1988

, the passage of Title VII was declared necessary: [t]o remove obstructions to the free flow of interstate and foreign commerce and to insure the complete and full enjoyment by all persons of the rights, privileges, and immunities … The presumption against extraterritorial application establishes a high hurdle for appellant’s arguments to overcome.

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,414 R. J. Bryan v. Brock & Blevins Co., Inc.

490 F.2d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 16, 1974

Bryan was fully apprised of the contemplated merger plan which would find him a dissenter and qualified to receive only appraisal remedies under the 1969 Georgia Corporation Statutes. … We think that the case so clearly establishes the right of the plaintiff to the relief granted by the trial court under general principles of corporation law, which we have discussed above, that we pretermit a determination

Brown v. Forest Oil Corp.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 11, 1994

La. 1991). 5 Brown stated in an affidavit that POI told him that it was a qualified self-insurer when he signed the Agreement. … Notably, Brown does not testify that POI told him that it was a qualified self-insurer under the LHWCA.

Bush v. Viterna

740 F.2d 350 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 20, 1984

protection of the laws in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, have caused them to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and have violated the rights, privileges, and immunities … Moreover, the Texas Attorney General's assertion that he does not represent counties is clearly a statement that he is not their "legal" representative.