Case law

Sanders v. Foti

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 30, 2001

Stalder has filed an interlocutory appeal challenging the magistrate judge’s denial of his qualified immunity defense to plaintiff Carla Sanders 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit. … As a result, the judgment denying qualified immunity is AFFIRMED.

Rodriguez-Castro v. Gonzales

427 F.3d 316 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 3, 2005

Rodriguez-Castro’s conviction for attempted misdemeanor child abandonment qualified as a CIMT. Thus, Ms. … Consequently, proof of the basic crime of child abandonment 9 requires the state to establish that the offender knew he was leaving the child in a place without a reasonably adequate

David Atkins v. Ken Salazar, Secretary

677 F.3d 667 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 13, 2011

Rizzo, 213 F.3d at 218 (“[Under the ADA,] it is the employee’s burden to prove that he is a qualified individual with a disability . . . , and it is the employer’s burden to establish [an affirmative defense].”). … The NPS Standards are clearly job-related for a park ranger. Detterline v. Salazar, 320 F.

Viacom International, Inc. v. IJR Capital Investme

891 F.3d 178 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 22, 2018

To establish a likelihood of confusion, Viacom must show “a probability of confusion, which is more than a mere possibility of confusion.” 57 Word association with Viacom’s The Krusty Krab is insufficient to establish a probable … Murillo’s word association, without more, does not establish bad faith at summary judgment.

Crist v. Crist

632 F.2d 1226 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 17, 1980

Under the relevant standard of review, findings of fact are not to *1229 be disturbed unless clearly erroneous. … We disagree with the district court in Crist that a Kahn compensation justification would immunize § 17(a)(7).

Career Colleges v. EDUC

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 4, 2024

At the preliminary injunction stage, the movant must clearly show only that each element of standing is likely to obtain in the case at hand.” Speech First, Inc. v. … Reg. 65,914, they are subject to sovereign immunity. Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 668-69, 94 S. Ct. 1347, 1358 (1974).

Hultberg v. State of Louisiana

163 F.3d 1356 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 24, 1998

. § 1997 et seq., which authorizes states to establish grievance procedures for inmates and allows courts to require exhaustion of those procedures. … Rameriz is entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983, or whether the district court abused its discretion in refusing to grant declaratory relief.

Landry's v. Ins of the State of PA

4 F.4th 366 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 21, 2021

ICSOP denied its duty to defend Landry’s, stating that the Underlying Paymentech Litigation “does not qualify for coverage” because “[n]one of the . . . … Merchants Fast Motor Lines, Inc., 939 S.W.2d 139, 141 (Tex. 1997) (holding that even if “the complaint does not state facts sufficient to clearly bring the case within or without the coverage, the general rule is

Powers v. C.I.R.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 26, 1995

Powers contends that the statements attached to his 1978 and 1979 returns fall short of qualifying as an election under § 172 in two ways. … Nonetheless, based on the record, we do not find that it was clearly erroneous or an abuse of discretion for the trial judge to have reduced this award.

Randolph v. Allen

73 F. 23 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 24, 1896

They clearly did not, at the time, consider the indebtedness of Hudson a bad debt. … The exception alleges that other facts claimed by complainant to have been established by the evidence neutralized this finding.

Powers v. C.I.R.

51 F.3d 34 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 26, 1995

Powers contends that the statements attached to his 1978 and 1979 returns fall short of qualifying as an election under § 172 in two ways. … Nonetheless, based on the record, we do not find that it was clearly erroneous or an abuse of discretion for the trial judge to have reduced this award.

Class v. Lumpkin

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

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination, Class must show: (1) that he is a qualified individual within the meaning of the ADA; (2) that he is being excluded from participation in, or … Area Rapid Transit, 391 F.3d 669, 671–72 (5th Cir. 2004). 5 The parties do not dispute the first prong—Class has a qualifying disability.

Harold Vineberg and Peter Demet v. Brunswick Corporation

391 F.2d 184 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 4, 1968

Brunswick urges that the first paragraph of the notes clearly expresses the intent of the parties that Vineberg and DeMet independently promised to pay the stated amounts with no qualifying limitation that Brunswick would … Once the existence of a latent ambiguity is established “ * * * parol evidence, including declarations and statements of intention by the parties, is allowable to *189 resolve [the] ambiguity.”

Simmons v. Epps

654 F.3d 526 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 30, 2011

Additionally, we find that the trial court’s exclusion of a self-made videotape as mitigating evidence was not objectively unreasonable in light of the clearly established constitutional precedent. … Instead, we can only decide whether the exclusion of the videotape was an unreasonable determination in light of clearly established federal law.

United States v. Sharpe

193 F.3d 852 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 20, 1999

In the end, the government granted Wright full immunity for his testimony. … This Circuit has established a two-part 29 test to determine when a deliberate ignorance instruction is warranted.

Brinkley & West, Inc. v. Foremost Insurance Company

499 F.2d 928 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 26, 1974

BROWN, Chief Judge: The history of this case exemplifies the precarious path that the federal courts must tread when they follow the *930 shifting tracks of the Erie Railroad. 1 In our original opinion 2 in this case the clearly … There the Louisiana Supreme Court found that a suit between two Louisiana domiciliaries, mother and son, arising from a Mississippi accident should not be barred by the Mississippi intrafamily immunity doctrine because the

Federal Deposit Insurance v. Claycomb

945 F.2d 853 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 23, 1991

Having failed to establish one of the essential elements of joint venture/partnership as a matter of law, SHWC cannot establish any recognizable legal defense in regard to partnership or joint venture. 19 For all of the foregoing … 787 S.W.2d 475, 492 (Tex.App.1990) [agreeing with the FSLIC’s arguments and recognizing other courts, which have drawn on the policy reasons articulated in D’Oench to fashion a federal common law rule granting a receiver immunity

United States v. Eric Carmouche

138 F.3d 1014 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 14, 1998

Our Court has been “quite permissive about what qualifies as a ‘motion for reconsideration.’” Id. at 1466 . … MOYA APPLIES ESTABLISHED PRECEDENT I do not read Moya to hold that a motion filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 35(c) suspends the appellate timetable.

Ruben Benitez v. Jeffrey Atkins

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 30, 2019

At some point in this flurry of filing, Atkins also filed a motion to dismiss, arguing, among other things, that he was entitled to qualified immunity on Benitez’s claims. … Finally, Atkins raises a colorable defense of qualified immunity, which this court has previously afforded to a clerk of a federal court in a damages suit such as this. See Williams v.

Beverly Camp Simpson v. John G. Simpson, III

490 F.2d 803 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 24, 1974

The conversations were mildly compromising establishing that the other man was making advances, and that while the wife was resisting, she was not doing so in a firm and final fashion. … We thus are bound by the principle that criminal statutes must be strictly construed, to avoid ensnaring behavior that is not clearly proscribed. See Kordel v.