Case law

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

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.

Doreen M. White v. Excalibur Insurance Company

599 F.2d 50 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 18, 1979

Motor carriers had attempted to immunize themselves from the negligence of the drivers who operated their vehicles by making them all nominally “independent contractors.” … The activities of each of the pair during a single driving stint, including his rest period, are clearly within the course of his employment.

Swint v. Pullman-Standard

624 F.2d 525 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 18, 1980

We proceed, therefore, to consider whether the defense set forth by Pullman-Standard qualifies as either a bona fide occupational qualification or a business necessity defense. … Findings of fact by the district court in Title VII cases are not to be set aside unless they are clearly erroneous, Harrison v.

American Benefit Life Insurance v. Baddock

544 F.2d 1291 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 10, 1977

American Benefit from contesting the size of his attorneys’ fee, we also hold that American Benefit has standing to appeal from all of the fee awards because the bankruptcy judge granted its motion to intervene without qualifying … American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp., 487 F.2d at 166, or by basing the award upon findings of fact that are clearly erroneous. Monson v.

Robert Keys v. Candace Torres

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 19, 2018

Qualified immunity affords government officials protection against individual liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … The defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity. See Brown v.

Darold L. Rutland v. Mike Moore, Attorney General of the State of Mississippi

54 F.3d 226 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 25, 1995

Wyoming, 460 U.S. 226 , 238 n. 11, 103 S.Ct. 1054 , 1061 n. 11, 75 L.Ed.2d 18 (1983) ("[s]ome employment decisions are so clearly connected to the execution of sovereign choices that they must be assimilated into them for … As is well established, and with very narrow exception, we do not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal; this issue is not such an exception. See Highlands Ins. Co. v. National Union Fire Ins.

United States v. Edward John Johnston, Iii, Also Known as Easy, Also Known as Ez, Also Known as Charles Edward Johnson, III

258 F.3d 361 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 13, 2001

. § 201 (c) when it utilized witnesses who were either paid informants or *363 were provided immunity from prosecution. … Clearly, if we were to follow narrowly the advisory committee note’s statement, then the issue would appear resolved.

United States v. Albert Samuel Fortna, Jr.

769 F.2d 243 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 12, 1985

We note initially our agreement with Delker, 757 F.2d at 1396-97 , that, consistent with the principle previously discussed, hearsay or other information not qualifying as admissible trial evidence is not necessarily an improper … It was never clearly explained how Fortna (who did not graduate from high school) had managed to amass so large a fortune since he started in business (with his father) in 1969. 11 .

Landry v. Two R. Drilling Co.

511 F.2d 138 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 9, 1975

. *142 The plaintiff’s expert witness, a qualified marine surveyor and safety expert, testified that in his opinion the handrailings on the rig near the shale shaker were inadequate. … Thus her authority as “personal representative” was fully established and was in no way defective. See Waldrip v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 11 F.R.D. 426 (W.D.La.1951). .

Joanne Stone v. Louisiana Dept of Revenue

707 F. App'x 216 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 31, 2017

Stone’s case—under Louisiana law, an ex-employer who is asked to provide a reference for an employee and “provides accurate information about a current or former employee’s job performance or reasons for separation shall be immune … prong, we need not reach the issue of whether Lockley’s alleged behaviors would qualify as adverse employment actions for purposes of retaliation. 7

United States v. Perrin

478 F.3d 672 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 9, 2007

First, Perrin did not produce child por- Congress established a series of distinctly nography, but merely possessed it. … Appx. at 267 (citing U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 comment. n.1(g) (“In determin- 7 ing whether a defendant qualifies under subsection United States v.

United States v. Laroy Johnson

943 F.3d 214 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 5, 2019

James Ryan, I think the proper predicate has been established . . . as to authenticity.” Our precedent supports that conclusion. … Taken together, this evidence clearly establishes that Johnson knowingly possessed the gun in furtherance of drug trafficking—a far cry from the “unloaded antique[ ] mounted on the

United States v. Efrain Ramirez

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 16, 2013

The New York statute and the criminal information establish that his conviction was for the sexual assault of a minor. Cf. United States v. … While the court clearly references the durational language included in subsection (F), this reference was not meant to limit the holding, but to emphasize the importance of deference to Congress.

Klamath Strategic Investment Fund Ex Rel. St. Croix Ventures v. United States

568 F.3d 537 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 22, 2009

This provision clearly grants the district court jurisdiction to determine the applicability of any penalty relating to an adjustment of a partnership item. … At trial, the Partnerships’ tax expert concluded that the opinion complied with standards established by Treasury Circular 230, which addresses conduct of practitioners who provide tax opinions.

Braniff Airways, Inc. v. Exxon Co.

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

“[I]t is essential to the establishment of a setoff that the claims or debts be mutual____” Braniff, 42 B.R. at 449 . … 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.

United States v. Robert Scully

951 F.3d 656 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 4, 2020

The district court found no “reason to divide the premises in two lots when the physical aspect of this whole set-up showed it was clearly one establishment with a worn pathway between the two and obviously Mr. … Misleading omissions qualify as false representations. See Pasquantino v. United States, 544 U.S. 349, 357 (2005).

Moore v. Quarterman

534 F.3d 454 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 7, 2008

application of . . . clearly established Federal law.’” … Neither was a habeas case, and neither even purported to apply “clearly established federal law as determined by the Su- preme Court . . . .” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).

Lamar Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Mississippi State Tax Commission

701 F.2d 314 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 11, 1983

Although the government clearly has the power to correct misleading omissions, “the preferred remedy is more disclosure, rather than less.” … This discussion clearly establishes that the court’s decision was based upon its now-rejected view of the unprotected First Amendment status of advertising in general, and the rights of commercial broadcasters in particular

Lee v. Stalder

223 F. App'x 315 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 12, 2007

We review de novo the denial of summaryjudgment predicated on qualified immunity. Beltran v. City of El Paso, 367 F.3d 299, 302 (5th Cir. 2004). We use a two-step approach to analyze qualified immunity claims. … If the plaintiff’s allegations could make out a constitutional violation, we then “ask whether the right was clearly established--that is, whether ‘it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful