Case law

Raymond Fobbs v. Daniel Davis

515 F. App'x 330 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 4, 2013

Based upon this paragraph, his grievance was denied as an improper grievance of “disciplinary matters.” 2 Defendants have since filed a motion for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity. … Streekstra, 227 F.3d 759, 762 (7th Cir. 2000) (rejecting the argument that “§1997e(a) [establishes] a right not simply to prevail but also to be free from litigation.”)

Archer and White Sales, Inc. v. Henry Schein, Inco

935 F.3d 274 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 14, 2019

This panel affirmed. 1 We determined that we need not reach the issue of whether the arbitration provision delegated the issue of arbitrability to an arbitrator because of a then-established narrow exception: where an assertion … and unmistakably delegated arbitrability “where a broad arbitration clause is subject to a qualifying provision that at least arguably covers the present dispute.” 33 Because there was ambiguity as to whether the parties

Fratta v. Quarterman

536 F.3d 485 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 22, 2008

established federal law. … First, the CCA’s use of corroborating evidence—such as phone records and physical evidence—to support the confessions’ trustworthiness was contrary to clearly established federal law.

Martha Ellerbrook v. City of Lubbock, Texas

465 F. App'x 324 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 14, 2012

The court noted that Martha attempted to establish pretext at trial by arguing that she was clearly better qualified for the position. … Second, she argued that she was clearly better qualified than Vander Kuy for the water programs coordinator position.

Banda v. City of McAllen, TX

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 4, 2025

The Schell and Brown defendants’ lengthy, defensive actions are clearly distinguishable from the City’s request for a state court finding that it was immune to a claim that had since been removed from Banda’s petition. … This argument is clearly refuted by the record.

Anson McFaul v. Daniel Valenzuela

684 F.3d 564 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 18, 2012

The defendants moved for protection from discovery, asserting an intent to raise a defense of qualified 5  Case: 11-10218 Document: 00511889245 Page: 6 Date Filed: 06/ … 18/2012 No. 11-10218 immunity.

Nancy Koehler v. Aetna Health, Inc.

683 F.3d 182 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 1, 2012

We find that the plan is ambiguous and the need for pre-authorization was not clearly stated in Aetna’s summary description of the plan. … See, e.g., 29 C.F.R. § 2520.102-3 (0(2) (requiring that a plan summary "clearly identify!]

Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company v. Florida East Coast Railway Company

399 F.2d 854 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 29, 1968

It seems equally plausible to qualify the contract language by the clause “so long as the agreement is in effect.” … It clearly contemplated a long term arrangement, because it provided for optional increases in premiums over five-year periods. The trial court found that 25 years was a reasonable term for the contract.

Steere Tank Lines, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America

694 F.2d 413 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 27, 1982

The Commission’s broadening is clearly “rational, logically supportable and fair.” American Trucking, supra, 659 F.2d at 464 . … The Commission’s judgment is, of course, constrained by the limitations we established in American Trucking, supra, and in the resulting mandamus opinion, supra.

Johnson v. American Credit Company Of Georgia

581 F.2d 526 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 6, 1978

Third, she contends that, because the six circumstances set forth in Ga.Code § 8-101 do not qualify as "extraordinary situations" of the type envisioned in Fuentes v. … We find that Johnson's action qualifies for class action status under F.R.Civ.P. 23 when the class is defined as we have in the following portion of this Part of our opinion.

PCI Transportation v. Fort Worth We RR Co

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 9, 2005

In the context of the collateral order doctrine, we perceive no difference in the distinction between Eleventh Amendment immunity and remand. … preliminary injunction will not disserve the public interest.40 “We have cautioned repeatedly that a preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy which should not be granted unless the party seeking it has ‘clearly

Bryan v. John Bean Division of FMC Corp.

566 F.2d 541 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 20, 1978

Green read you does not establish there was negligence. It does not establish the truth of what that expert says. … As Chief Judge Brown lucidly illustrates in his article Federal Special Verdicts: The Doubt Eliminator, 44 F.R.D. 338 (1968), special verdicts eliminate the opacity of the general verdict and clearly disclose the bases of

Paugh v. Lockheed Martin

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 26, 2023

Regardless, an employee’s “better education, work experience, and longer tenure with the company do not establish that he is clearly better qualified.” Price v. Fed. … Paugh has failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether she was clearly more qualified than Padilla.

Bayou Verret Land Co. v. Commissioner

450 F.2d 850 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 2, 1971

We are unable to say that the findings are clearly erroneous or the ultimate conclusion incorrect. … We reject the threshold contention that the Tax Court’s findings were clearly erroneous.

Vander Zee v. Reno

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 9, 1996

immunity because the interests allegedly infringed were not “clearly established.” … Alternatively, the district court held that the United States Attorneys were entitled to qualified immunity as the interests allegedly infringed were not “clearly established.”

Larin-Ulloa v. Gonzales

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 22, 2007

We next consider whether Larin’s conviction under subsection (a)(1)(C) qualifies as an aggravated felony. … The BIA stated that the “judgment nunc pro tunc clearly reflects that [Larin] committed the aggravated battery with a firearm. . . .

Image of Greater San Antonio, Texas v. Harold Brown, Secretary of Defense, American Federation of Government Employees, A.F.L., C.I.O., Local 1617 v. Harold Brown, Secretary of Defense

570 F.2d 517 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 30, 1978

The Court did not think it necessary for defendants to prove that scores on the test were related to actual job performance, a requirement clearly established in Griggs. 5 The Court similarly did not require proof that performance … Although the Air Force has made some reference to provisions allowing an employee whose position has been abolished to "bump" an employee with less seniority out of a position that the first employee is qualified to fill,

Consum Data Indust Assoc v. State of TX

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 25, 2023

Still, a plaintiff must establish standing for each form of relief sought. See Transunion, LLC v. Ramirez, 141 S. … Such a reduction satisfies the redressability required to establish standing. See Sanchez v.

Edwards v. City of Houston

37 F.3d 1097 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 10, 1994

As a preliminary matter, we note that petitioner bears the burden of establishing the invalidity of the [Consent Decree].... … The Consent Decree requires only the remedial promotion of qualified blacks and hispanies. Only members of the plaintiff class who have passed the appropriate promotional exam are eligible for promotion.

United States v. Frank Lafayette Bird

124 F.3d 667 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 24, 1997

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor … The Court found that the statute “clearly and precisely delineate[d] its reach in words of common understanding.” Id. at 615-17, 88 S.Ct. at 1338.