Case law

Johnson v. Gambrinus Company

116 F.3d 1052 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 2, 1997

Title I of the ADA provides that discrimination includes “not making reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability . . . unless [the employer … Gambrinus argues that this finding is clearly erroneous because the glass barrier was not in place on July 8, 1993 when Johnson wanted to tour the brewery.

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

United States of America, Cross-Appellant v. Marsden W. Miller, Jr., and William C. Huls, Cross-Appellees

952 F.2d 866 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 23, 1992

It would be a high price indeed for society to pay were every accused granted immunity from punishment because of any defect sufficient to constitute reversible error in the proceedings leading to conviction. … And clearly, it was not duplicitous to include the stock sale language in count one.

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.

Williams v. Brasea, Inc.

497 F.2d 67 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 5, 1974

This point seems to us so close as to require that we defer to the judgment of the trial court as not clearly erroneous. … Thus we qualify our holding by saying that even if products liability law is to be incorporated into our general maritime law, there can be no liability under the facts of this case.

Gayle Duwayne Kindred v. Phillip Spears, Warden and United States Parole Commission

894 F.2d 1477 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 28, 1990

See 18 U.S.C. section 4203 (conferring power on Commission to establish guidelines to aid in the exercise of its powers); Maddox v. United States Parole Comm’n, 821 F.2d 997, 999 (5th Cir.1987). … We do not find it overly intrusive to hold the Commission to its statutory mandate of providing clearly articulated reasons nor to infer a requirement that that reasoning be contemporaneous.

J. B. Zarzaur v. United States

493 F.2d 447 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 28, 1974

To qualify as a private club under 26 U.S.C. § 4231 we stated on first hearing of this case that “a club may be either a public or private facility, depending upon the use that is made of the facility and the restrictions … These standards were clearly enunciated in our first opinion in this case in reliance upon the Fourth Circuit’s decision in Club Ramon, Inc. v.

Jeff Armstrong v. Turner Industries, Inc.

141 F.3d 554 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 8, 1998

Consequently, Armstrong’s allegations are clearly insufficient under well-established law to support standing to seek an injunction. 25 Although Armstrong did ask for declaratory relief, we note that for the same reason he … In the case at bar, the harm caused, i.e., an adverse employment decision, clearly falls within the class of harms covered by Title I of the ADA.

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.

Lajuan and Billy Wood v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.

736 F.2d 1084 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 23, 1984

After returning home, Billy submitted the roll of film to an establishment that employed a mechanical developing process. … The privacy tort of public disclosure of highly offensive private facts more clearly invades personality than reputation.

Nos. 97-20138, 98-20001

151 F.3d 186 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 11, 1998

This annexation was not consensual on the part of the residents of Kingwood, as this lawsuit so clearly indicates. … The quoted language cannot qualify as a holding with precedential value in this case.

United States v. Peter Park

947 F.2d 130 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 14, 1992

I don’t believe he’s qualified to make that kind of— THE COURT: Well I think he can answer that. He can tell us what he knows. I will overrule it. MR. … At trial, Park offered evidence that the taped announcements were not clearly audible in a restaurant where he and his wife were eating breakfast.

United States v. John E. McKenzie Dale Bonura and Stephen Farrar

768 F.2d 602 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 31, 1985

The record establishes that the defendants knew of this tape, or at least had a firm belief that it existed, before the trial began. … The statement, in its entirety, clearly relates to the subject matter of Davis’s testimony. Therefore, failure to produce it violates the Jencks Act.

Sugar Busters LLC v. Ellen C. Brennan Theodore M. Brennan Shamrock Publishing Inc.

177 F.3d 258 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 25, 1999

Because this element “presents a mixed question of law and fact, this court must uphold the district court’s subsidiary fact findings unless clearly erroneous; conclusions of law and the ultimate application of the law to … We conclude that even if the district court applied this standard, its finding that goodwill was transferred between Elliott and plaintiff is clearly erroneous.

Rodolfo Sanchez v. Art Acevedo

774 F.3d 873 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 18, 2014

The City clearly subjected Plaintiffs to the policy.” Sanchez v. City of Austin, No. 1:11-cv-00993-LY, slip op. at 2 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 4, 2013), ECF No. 81 [hereinafter Post-Trial Order]. … Apr. 9, 2013), where the district court again denied fees, finding three special circumstances: the defendant’s qualified immunity, the absence of a policy or custom of discrimination by the defendants, and “the limited nature

Nora Faye Johnson v. United States

576 F.2d 606 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 13, 1978

These may be created, modified and enforced by the state acting through its own judicial establishment. … Applying these tests to the instant case, the prior judgment clearly precludes relitigation of facts actually litigated and necessary to the earlier judgment.

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

Gorsalitz v. Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp.

429 F.2d 1033 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 17, 1970

Olin further answered the .interrogatories : “There are no employees working for Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation qualified to make the repairs contracted out to General Electric and'this is for the reason that it is more … It is agreed that the burden of proof to establish the affirmative of Interrogatory Number 5 is upon the defendant, Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation.