Case law

Huard v. Shreveport Pirates, Inc.

147 F.3d 406 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 20, 1998

With respect to commingling, the plaintiffs argue that the frequent transfers of funds to and from Glieberman and his corporations qualify as commingling. … Furthermore, both plaintiffs had to have realized that establishing a CFL football team in Shreveport, Louisiana, could only be characterized as a risky and uncertain venture.

Anh Le v. Loretta Lynch

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 11, 2016

The court in Almanza-Arenas used the modified categorical approach to determine whether a particular offense qualified as a crime of moral turpitude rendering the alien ineligible for cancellation of removal. 771 F.3d at … INS, 123 F.3d 1322, 1326 (9th Cir. 1997) (stating that Congress has expressed great zeal in eliminating illicit drug trafficking and has “clearly 16  Case: 13-60664 Document:

Arensdorf v. Geithner

329 F. App'x 514 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 12, 2009

Arensdorf fails to establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination because, inter alia, “she offers no evidence that she was qualified for her position”. Arensdorf v. Paulson, No. 4:06-CV-3324 (S.D. … Arensdorf fails to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination because, inter alia, she fails to show she is qualified for her position.

Marc Veasey v. Greg Abbott

888 F.3d 792 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 27, 2018

This remains a plausible view of the evidence in light of the record and is therefore not clearly erroneous. See Washington v. … photo ID or the underlying documentation necessary to obtain qualifying photo ID.”

SGS Control Services v. Director

86 F.3d 438 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 27, 1996

Jackson qualified this release, stating that when he wrote the note he believed that Mr. … Barrios sought only temporary total disability payments; (3) the evidence did not establish that Mr.

Estate of Ira J. Sanders v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 20, 2014

although the plaintiff’s experts did not identify individual defendants by name, there was “a significant amount of expert testimony . . . regarding individual staff members’ negligence,” and “the depositions as a whole clearly … Sklaroff was qualified to give an expert opinion as to the standard of care applicable to a gastroenterologist such as Dr. Azzouz. 12

United States v. Lonnie M. Brown, Robert L. Newsome, James B. Finney, Julian E. Seymour, Jr., and Benjamin Clyde Cranford, Jr.

555 F.2d 407 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 24, 1977

These qualifying instructions, coupled with the overwhelming evidence of guilt, lead us to conclude that, as in Holland and McDuffie , the error here was harmless. … In addition, these statements, as well as those offered not in proof of their contents, were clearly admissible to establish other facts. 43 .

Melancon v. Kaylo

259 F.3d 401 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 6, 2001

From that point, the limitations period was clearly tolled until December 9, 1997, when the trial court denied post conviction relief. … Because Melancon did not expediently file his federal habeas petition, this circumstance is not extraordinary enough to qualify for equitable tolling under § 2244(d)(1).

Mattern v. Eastman Kodak Co

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 2, 1997

In the present case the jury's retaliation award was not clearly erroneous and should have been affirmed. … The plaintiff argued for a modification of the McDonnell Douglas formula under which a claimant could establish a prima facie case by showing that he belonged to a minority; he qualified for the position;

Cassius Marsellus Clay, Jr. v. United States

397 F.2d 901 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 6, 1968

Most important, the registrant bears the burden of clearly establishing a right to the ministerial exemption and the board has no affirmative duty to ascertain whether or not the registrant qualifies for the exemption. … And since the ministerial exemption is a matter of legislative grace, the selective service registrant bears the burden of clearly establishing a right to the exemption.”

Kirby Corporation v. USA

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 9, 1997

To qualify for a loan guarantee, a prospective vessel owner must meet certain requirements specified by Title XI and the accompanying MarAd regulations, see 46 U.S.C.App. § 1274(d)(1); 46 … We must assume that the Congress intends, and the language of the statute will clearly provide, for a firm Government obligation which is clear, definite, and unalterable. Id. at 67.

Sarah Martin v. Trend Personnel Services, e

656 F. App'x 34 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 31, 2016

To determine whether a particular plan qualifies as an ERISA employee welfare benefit plan, this court “ask[s] whether a plan: (1) exists; (2) falls within the safe-harbor provision established by the Department of Labor; … The district court did not clearly err in finding that Trend did not employ a benefits administrator. 7

Beatriz Ball v. Barbagallo Company

40 F.4th 308 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 12, 2022

To prevail on its trade dress infringement claim, Beatriz Ball must prove that: (1) its trade dress qualifies for protection; and (2) the trade dress has been the registrations’ validity, both judicial efficiency … The district court clearly erred in concluding otherwise.

United States v. James

528 F.2d 999 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 19, 1976

Vasquez, 5 Cir., 476 F.2d 730 (1973). 23 Henry’s Claim of Immunity from Prosecution Henry, a native born citizen of the United States, claims that he enjoys immunity from prosecution in this country for crimes of the type … Those findings are binding on this Court unless they are clearly erroneous. United States v. Gunn, 5 Cir., 428 F.2d 1057 (1970).

Cactus Pipe & Supply Co., Inc., Cross-Appellee v. M/v Montmartre, Her Engines, Tackle, Etc., Orient Leasing Co., Ltd., Cross v. Corinth Pipeworks, S.A., Cross Cross-Appellant

756 F.2d 1103 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 5, 1985

Nor was apparent authority established. … Yet, the majority concludes that the omission of the "without waiving its defense" qualifying language gave the court in rem jurisdiction in the first case.

United States v. Francisco Colorado Cessa

785 F.3d 165 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 7, 2015

Piloto won the race by a nose—even though he had the slowest qualifying time. As a reward for having successfully paid off all the starters, Miguel Trevino rewarded Carlos Nayen with 10 kilograms of cocaine. B. … Jose Trevino points to no evidence that rebuts the PSR’s analysis or establishes that the district court’s factual finding was clearly erroneous.

Jonathan Boyer v. Darrel Vannoy, Warden

863 F.3d 428 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 17, 2017

The state áppellate court decision was not contrary to clearly established Supreme Court law. Nor did it involve an unreasonable application of Supreme Court law. … “A state court’s decision constitutes an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law if it is ‘objectively unreasonable.’ ” 139 “The court may grant relief under the .

United States v. William Leslie Wright, Jr.

588 F.2d 189 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 22, 1979

Customs Officer Summers, in an unmarked car, established surveillance just east of Redford on Highway 170. … Appellant’s activities clearly furnished the officers grounds to reasonably suspect he was involved in trafficking of illegal drugs.

Bullard v. The City of Houston

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 23, 1997

The individual defendants moved for dismissal based on qualified immunity. The qualified immunity analysis is a familiar one. … To determine that the 4 defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity, it must be apparent that they knew their conduct violated a clearly established

Anibal Sotto v. Louie L. Wainwright, Secretary, Department of Corrections, Joaquin A. Amor v. Louie L. Wainwright, Secretary, Department of Corrections

601 F.2d 184 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 22, 1979

considered the principles of due process involved in this case" and, though conceding that "the Fifth Circuit was, of course, interpreting a federal rule," declared that "the rationale underlying the Mendoza decision is clearly … It protects against state transgression only those personal immunities that are "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty," Palko v.