Case law

Seidenstein, M.D. v. National Medical Enterprises, Inc.

769 F.2d 1100 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 3, 1985

The Supreme Court defined the two elements of establishing monopoly in United States v. … Defamation was established and malice was established. 42 This Court takes away from plaintiff a jury verdict which on its face has sufficient evidence to support it. We have no authority to do this.

United States v. Hyde

574 F.2d 856 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 9, 1978

Clearly, however, probable cause to intercept communications may exist even where no tangible evidence can be found. … Middlebrooks (whose complicity in the cocaine conspiracy was established beyond question).

In the Matter of Topco, Inc., Debtor. River Production, Co., Inc. v. Jack M. Webb, Trustee

894 F.2d 727 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 20, 1990

Because Section 158(c) establishes appellate procedure only for appeals from bankruptcy courts to district courts, Section 158(c) does not establish the time limit for appeals to courts of appeals. … Section 158(d) clearly grants courts of appeals jurisdiction over the former and just as clearly does not grant courts of appeals jurisdiction over the latter.

Hendrix v. Joseph

559 F.2d 1265 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 12, 1977

In doing so we keep in mind that while no factual finding may be disturbed unless clearly erroneous, the failure to find facts necessary to support a result is an error of law. … This clearly implies that although the population is 36% black, the percentage of voters who are black is significantly smaller.

United States v. William Robert Cook and Charles Stafford Jackson, A/K/A Cal Stewart

557 F.2d 1149 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 19, 1977

To qualify for admission under Rule 404(b), therefore, the injunction documents here would have to evidence the commission of some crime, wrong or act at least related in nature to the present charge of mail fraud. … Though it was error to admit the injunction documents, the error was clearly harmless, within the Chapman standard in Jackson’s case.

Williams v. Brasea

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

P. 52(a), and may overturn only a finding of fact which we determine to be 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.

United States v. Moreno-Martinez

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 9, 2025

Alternatively, Moreno challenges the application of the serious bodily-injury enhancement under Guideline § 2A4.1(b)(2)(B), contending the record does not sufficiently establish the severity of a victim’s injuries. … In short, it is plausible to infer that the injuries in question qualified as serious bodily injuries.

Chaisson v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 8, 2024

“We review questions of subject matter jurisdiction, including sovereign immunity determinations, de novo.” 1 “The United States, as sovereign, is immune from suit save as it consents to be sued, and the terms of … Filed: 01/08/2024 No. 23-10551 revenue laws.” 4 However, “[d]espite its spacious terms, § 1346(a)(1) must be read in conformity with other statutory provisions which qualify

Robert Lafayette Potter, Jr. v. United States

362 F.2d 493 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 23, 1966

vehicle considered to be the suspect, that immediately the description of the automobile, its manner of *497 having been loaded and its acceleration to a high rate of speed in an attempt to avoid, to make chase you might say, clearly … If this is worth anything, it was qualified by his later testimony, “when I pulled in behind the car and he began to run, I figured something was wrong”.

Continental Airlines, Inc. v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, International

555 F.3d 399 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 13, 2009

At the time of his discharge he was on long-term disability status and was not qualified to fly. … There can be no dispute that the SBA qualifies as a third party and is swept into the regulation’s scope by the “no one” language.

Forsythe International, S.A. v. Gibbs Oil Company of Texas

915 F.2d 1017 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 31, 1990

The parties disputed whether the term “EEC qualified” meant duty-free. The panel bypassed the semantic dispute, noting only that various contract amendments had not expressly abolished duty-free status. … [where] the issue is whether the facts satisfy the statutory standard, or ... whether the rule of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated.” Id. at 289 & n. 19, 102 S.Ct. at 1790 & n. 19.

Meyer Braun, D/B/A Rex the Tailor v. Theodore W. Berenson, D/B/A Gulfgate Shopping Center

432 F.2d 538 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 30, 1970

It is well established that, in the case of an unincorporated association, the association will be treated analogously to a corporation, Denver & R. G. W. R. Co. v. … It has been decided that “ ‘found’ in the venue sense does not necessarily mean physical presence” and that a general appearance to defend, the filing of an answer or counterclaim, is sufficient presence to qualify.

Joseph v. Dykes

368 F. App'x 511 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 2, 2010

To establish retaliation, a prisoner must show “(1) a specific constitutional right, (2) the defendant’s intent to retaliate against the prisoner for his or her exercise of that right, (3) a retaliatory adverse act, and ( … The officers also claimed qualified immunity in the district court, but neither party mentions that issue on appeal. 4

Aviles-Tavera v. Garland

22 F.4th 478 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 4, 2022

Thereafter, Gracia-Cantu clearly established that Aviles’s felony assault conviction was a crime of violence under § 16(a). … Borden held that an offense requiring only a mens rea of recklessness could not qualify as a violent felony under 18 U.S.C. § 924.17 Aviles forfeited this argument because he failed to raise the substantive argument

Nathenson v. Zonagen Inc.

267 F.3d 400 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 15, 2001

The broad contours of the events in question are as follows. 2 An adjuvant a is foreign substance that improves a given immune response in the body by enhancing the effect of a particular antigen, which is … The April 1, 1996 10K also refers to Immumax as a “unique naturally occurring substance which enhances the immune response against weakly immunogenic materials.”

Credit Union Liquidity Services, L.L.C. v. Green Hills Development Co.

741 F.3d 651 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 3, 2014

The provision enumerates other criteria for qualifying claims not relevant to this dispute, for example that they be noncontingent and meet a minimum dollar amount. Id. 14 United States v. Am. Ry. … [is] clearly on point and [does] not favor the [sanctioned party].”44 41 11 U.S.C. § 303(b)(1) (emphasis added). 42 FED. R. APP. P. 38. 43 Howard v. St.

Western Coal Traffic League and Its Members v. United States of America and Interstate Commerce Commission

694 F.2d 378 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 7, 1983

When such evidence is considered, the number of rates immunized from regulation is increased. … We preface the factual background with a review of established precepts.

Coble v. Dretke

444 F.3d 345 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 22, 2006

A state court decision is “contrary to ... clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court” if: (1) “the state court applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth in [the Supreme Court’s] … A state court’s incorrect application of clearly established Supreme Court precedent is not enough to warrant federal habeas relief; in addition, such an application must also be unreasonable.

Taylor v. McKeithen

499 F.2d 893 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 21, 1974

The established boundaries of Wards 8 and 9 have existed in Louisiana law for many decades. … Here, the district judge clearly spoke in terms of racial districting.

Kirschbaum v. Reliant Energy, Inc.

526 F.3d 243 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 25, 2008

Despite Kirschbaum’s efforts on appeal to recast this as a claim of imprudence, Count I clearly states a failure to diversify. … [are] not violated by acquisition or holding of qualifying employer real property or qualifying employer securities [in an EIAP].” § 1104(a)(2).