Case law

Donald Bryan Strickland, Jr., a Minor Through Mrs. Joyce Ann Lockridge Strickland, Guardian Ad Litem v. Transamerica Insurance Company

481 F.2d 138 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 9, 1973

Koehring Company, 267 So.2d 270 (La.App.3rd Cir. 1972), writs granted, 263 La. 233 , 267 So.2d 726 , in which the Louisiana court said : “The trial judge was clearly correct in finding Frenzel negligent. … We note that Transameriea could have eliminated any ambiguity in exclusion (g) and (h) merely by qualifying the term “the insured” with the descriptive term “named” preceding the word insured.

Estate of A.R. v. Terry Grier

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

Even taking all the evidence A.R. presents as true, she at most only establishes negligence. … [of] whether Louisiana’s Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity” barred claims under the ADA and Section 504.

Sauquoit Fibers Co. v. Leesona Corp.

498 F.2d 271 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 29, 1974

invention * * * [must have] * * * been tested so far as to make sure that it will operate under service conditions. * * * [A] test under service conditions is necessary in those cases, and in those only, in which persons qualified … Such a rule would be at odds with the controlling Supreme Court pronouncement, which clearly permits experiments that do not result in further change — phase three experimentation.

Houston Welfare Rights Organization, Inc. v. Raymond W. Vowell, Etc.

555 F.2d 1219 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 13, 1977

FACTS Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) is a public assistance program established by the Social Security Act of 1935, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 602 (1970). … These, too, qualified as lodgers with no provisions specifically mentioning that their status was a way of presuming that their income was available to the family. 7 .

Francisco Elizarraras v. Bank of El Paso

631 F.2d 366 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 24, 1980

The Mexican bank officers’ oral assertions that his account had been reduced by $12,800 and $2,000 were clearly hearsay (moreover, there was no proffer, so they would be impossible to review). … A qualified witness must be one with knowledge of the declarant’s business; appellee is not shown to have such knowledge.

Max Alexander Soffar v. Janie Cockrell, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division

300 F.3d 588 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 29, 2002

First of all, the en banc majority states as a matter of established law that “in order to qualify as existing, a rule must be dictated by Supreme Court precedent, not Circuit Court precedent.” Majority op. at p. 592. … Discussion Among the important safeguards established by Miranda is the “right to cut off questioning,” Miranda v.

Royal Smit Transformers BV v. Onego Shipping & Chartering

898 F.3d 543 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 2, 2018

Nor does Royal contest that the defendants qualify as those beneficiaries. … Onego and Central Oceans are clearly the parties between which the bill of lading was formed.

Edwards v. Principi

80 F. App'x 950 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 18, 2003

A plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of discrimination in non-promotion by showing that: (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he sought and was qualified for the position to be filled; (3) he was rejected … Rather, a plaintiff must show that a trier of fact could find that he was clearly better qualified than the person selected. Id.

John Russell Thompson v. James A. Lynaugh, Interim Director, Texas Department of Corrections

821 F.2d 1054 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 3, 1987

. *1057 The evidence established that, after some unsuccessful plea negotiations, the State had previously tried Thompson for the murder of Mrs. … But there is neither an allegation nor any evidence to indicate that she would have done so — or that, if she had, she would not have been afforded immunity. I.

United States v. Cisneros

206 F.3d 448 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 4, 2001

The title is unambiguous and clearly employs “interstate commerce” to modify “facility,” not “use.” … This alternative use in a legislative report cannot conclusively establish Congress’ intent in drafting the statute.

Robert Bernard v. Binnings Construction Co., Inc.

741 F.2d 824 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 17, 1984

The benefits of the Jones Act 8 are available only if the claimant qualifies as a seaman. The burden of establishing seaman status is, of course, on the party claiming the benefits to be derived therefrom. … The record clearly established that its only movement was between pilings and that, during that movement, it was normally, though not always, attached to the pier by at least one rope. Id. at 645 .

Richard v. Hoechst Celanese Chemical Group, Inc.

355 F.3d 345 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 19, 2003

However, as discussed below, Richard’s § 1983 claim is clearly untenable. … Section 1964(a) establishes that equitable remedies are available only to prevent ongoing and future conduct.

Herman Jackson, Jr. v. James B. Godwin, Etc.

400 F.2d 529 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 23, 1968

Negro students because of their race while it imposed no such burden on qualified white students. … That the hometown newspaper rule manifestly burdens the Negro prisoners is clearly demonstrated on this record.

UMG Recordings v. Grande Comm

118 F.4th 697 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 9, 2024

Section 512 thus balances the interests of copyright owners (who need the help of ISPs to stop mass infringements by subscribers of their networks) and ISPs (who are immunized from infringement claims seeking damages if they … Grande has therefore forfeited any argument that Plaintiffs failed to establish ownership over the works in suit, see Smith v. Sch.

First City National Bank v. Federal Deposit Insurance

782 F.2d 1344 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 20, 1986

One of the most important requirements of Brown’s business is that he employ highly qualified professionals. … We need not determine whether this conclusion is supported by the record or is clearly erroneous, or, indeed, what the effect of negligence would be.

Dallas Power & Light Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.

855 F.2d 203 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 19, 1988

The summary judgment evidence established that Mr. Hardin could not have had responsibility for the lockplates except where they were removed and available for inspection. … Thus, the provision clearly anticipates the reimbursement for costs of repair as well as personal repair or replacement by Westinghouse.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. DynMcDermott Petroleum Operations Co.

537 F. App'x 437 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 26, 2013

A showing that the unsuccessful employee was clearly better qualified (as opposed to merely better or as qualified) than the employees who are selected will be sufficient to prove that the employer’s proffered … We note that this high standard applies in cases where the plaintiff seeks to show that he was “clearly better qualified” than the person selected for the position. See Celestine, 266 F.3d at 356; Burrell v. Dr.

Edwin C. Covington v. Aubrey Cole, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Jaspercounty, Texas

528 F.2d 1365 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 1, 1976

Covington was qualified to practice law, the Magistrate and the district court apparently misapprehended what is meant by “attorney in fact.” Mrs. Covington was purporting to be Mr. … We note that the district attorneys who are defendants here may be officially immune to suit for alleged improper acts, if those acts were alleged to be committed within the scope of their official trial-related duties.

Coleman v. Grapevine City of

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 31, 1996

In assessing a claim of qualified immunity, the court must first determine whether the plaintiff has alleged the violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Rankin v. … If so, the court must then decide whether the defendant's conduct was objectively reasonable in order to determine whether he is entitled to qualified immunity. Id.

Clarke v. Hegmann

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 15, 2003

His allegation further showing that the defendants’ conduct was not objectively reasonable under the clearly established law in effect at the time of the conduct in question. See Shipp v. … Clarke has sufficiently pleaded facts to overcome the defense of qualified immunity at this stage of the proceeding. Id. at 910; 2 Harris v.