Case law

Martinez v. Mukasey

519 F.3d 532 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 11, 2008

It allows the Attorney General, in his discretion, to waive certain enumerated criminal grounds for inadmissibility for qualifying aliens. 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (h). … Of course, we recognize the well-established maxim that statutes should be construed to avoid an absurd result.

Blanton v. Quarterman

543 F.3d 230 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 19, 2008

A state court’s decision is contrary to clearly established Supreme Court precedent if it applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth in Supreme Court cases, or if it confronts a set of facts that are materially … A state court unreasonably applies clearly established federal law if it identifies the correct governing principle, but unreasonably applies that principle to the facts of the case. See Brown v.

Xiaodong Li v. Gonzales

420 F.3d 500 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 9, 2005

Unlike asylum claims, which are granted to qualified aliens at the discretion of the Attorney General, the former § 1253(h) of the immigration statute requires that the Attorney General withhold deportation of an alien if … Li argues that it should be beyond peradventure that he was persecuted on account of his religion because he was arrested and abused as a result of clearly religious activities.

Marina N. Oswald Porter, Individually, Etc. v. United States

473 F.2d 1329 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 12, 1973

Until recently it was generally assumed that the government was immune to suits for infringement of copyright. 14 To remedy this obviously inequitable situation Congress, in 1960, amended 28 U.S.C.A. § 1498 , which theretofore … We are of the view that the decision whether or not to publish these writings was a matter clearly committed to the discretion of the Commission.

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.

Love v. Foster

100 F.3d 413 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 15, 1996

It is not disputed that the main purpose of the federal law, as clearly demonstrated by its text and legislative history, is to establish the federal election day to restrict the states’ original powers to conduct Congressional … "The [appellants] do not dispute that where only one candidate 'qualifies’ for U.S. Representative or U.S.

A. Duda & Sons, Inc. v. United States

560 F.2d 669 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 7, 1977

Section 612 of the Code establishes the basis for cost depletion deductions. … The Commissioner, however, has clearly answered this question.

Schwegmann Bank & Trust Co. Of Jefferson v. Elva S. Falkenberg, Charles B. Caldwell, Jr.

931 F.2d 1081 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 28, 1991

Negotiability of the Note A writing must meet the requirements of section 3-104 to qualify as a negotiable instrument under Louisiana law. *1084 See La.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 10:3-104. … We refuse to engage in a complicated analysis of legislative history when the plain language of the statute clearly establishes that the variable interest rate expressed on the face of the note does not destroy its negotiability

Putnam v. United States

32 F.3d 911 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 9, 1994

. § 162, which establishes when business expenses may be deducted from a taxpayer’s reported gross income. … Clearly, when retired federal judges incur necessary and ordinary expenses traveling “away from home in the pursuit of business” as defined in the tax code, those expenses will not only be reimbursable under 28 U.S.C. §§

Kirkley David, L. Little, J. E. Clark v. Pitser Garrison and Ed Wareing

553 F.2d 923 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 2, 1977

The Court has clearly stated that no one group is constitutionally entitled to elect representatives from that group. Kirksey v. … There are no findings, however, as to whether any blacks applied for these positions, nor as to whether any black applicants were qualified for the positions they sought.

Harry Vincent Brown, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. Itt Rayonier, Inc., Defendant-Appellant-Cross

497 F.2d 234 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 18, 1974

In the first place, to the extent we must class appellee as either a seaman or a harbor worker, we think him much more akin to workers who clearly fall in the latter category. … We are thus confronted with the possibility that while appellee is not a Jones Act seaman, he may nonetheless qualify for relief under the general maritime law.

United States v. Jesus Montalvo Davila

890 F.3d 583 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 16, 2018

The root of “demonstrably”— “demonstrate”—means “to show clearly”, or “to prove or make clear by reasoning or evidence”. … Far less unfair is when, as here, our panel did exactly what it was supposed to do: apply the rule of orderliness to affirm Davila’s sentence based on established precedent.

Love v. Dell, Inc.

551 F.3d 333 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 2, 2008

McDanald,1 that the Spruce Mountain treatment was not medically necessary and that Heidtman qualified for “intensive outpatient” treatment only, not residential treatment. … But Menninger was clearly classified as an acute facility under ValueOptions’ framework; the first time that Heidtman was treated there, ValueOptions informed Love of this fact.

In re: Gregg Abbott

954 F.3d 772 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 7, 2020

In issuing the TRO, the district court clearly abused its discretion by failing to apply (or even acknowledge) the framework governing emergency exercises of state authority during a public health crisis, established over … Code Ann. § 41- 41-191(3)(j), and the physician’s “reasonable medical judgment” of a qualifying fetal abnormality, id. § 41-41-191(3)(h).

Ford v. Scallen

127 F.3d 33 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 8, 1997

Art. 3492 (West 1997). 5 Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, on all of Ford’s claims. … Because of Ford’s inability to assert causation, we do not need to go beyond the parameters of this discussion and address the Defendants’ qualified immunity argument.

In Re Lloyd's Register North America, Inc.

780 F.3d 283 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 18, 2015

A court commits a clear abuse of discretion, however, when it “clearly exceeds the bounds of judicial discretion.” Id. at 310. … In re Volkswagen of America, Inc., 545 F.3d 304, 319 (5th Cir. 2008) (en banc), the court did consider the unavailability of § 1292(b) certification to be relevant in concluding that a denial of a venue-transfer motion qualified

Howard G. Pinder, Sr., and Howard G. Pinder, Jr. v. United States

330 F.2d 119 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 8, 1964

That he picked up at the Knight Paper Company on several occasions will call orders of envelopes clearly shown to have been used in the lottery, although denied by him, was established by the testimony of a disinterested … It was clearly admissible for that purpose. It was not used as a basis for the assessment.

Ratliff v. City of Gainesville

256 F.3d 355 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 17, 2001

The City contends that his experience in these cities did not qualify him for the position in Gainesville, given its view that those cities are not stand alone cities. … However, “[c]hallenges to jury instructions are reviewed to determine whether the court’s charge, as a whole, is a correct statement of the law and clearly instructs jurors on the legal principles at issue.”

United States v. Curtis L. Parker and Martha Parker

376 F.2d 402 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 13, 1967

While Eaves did not qualify under § 12:15, subd. A(3), he did qualify under § 12:15, subd. A(l). … When control is diffused, the same reasoning establishes, to a lesser degree, that shares enabling their holder to participate in control are worth more than those that do not.

Dick Andrew Gee v. United States

452 F.2d 849 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 22, 1971

Welsh clearly does not invalidate the statute under which Gee was convicted. 11 But even assuming that the district court correctly stated the legal principles as to waiver of post plea defenses, 12 we find it unnecessary … qualified for exemption. 14 In Welsh, Justice Black stated: What is necessary under Seeger for a registrant’s conscientious objection to all war to be “religious” within the meaning of § 6 (j) is that this opposition to