Case law

Shelak v. White Motor Co.

581 F.2d 1155 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 10, 1978

It must be assumed that plaintiff’s counsel had applied himself diligently to his client’s cause for almost two years and was yet unable to find, until the jury selection day, any qualified physician of the medical opinion … This argument clearly is without support in the law. The Texas courts have adopted § 402A of the Second Restatement of Torts. McKisson v. Sales Affiliates, Inc., 416 S.W.2d 787 (Tex.1967).

American Family Life Assurance v. Glenda Biles, et

714 F.3d 887 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 1, 2013

Because this federal court proceeding has clearly progressed further than the related state court proceeding, the fourth factor favors federal jurisdiction. … An order compelling arbitration, i.e., the district court’s order below, is a final decision that qualifies as a “judgment” under the Anti-Injunction Act. Am. Heritage Life Ins. Co. v.

Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Calvert Fire Insurance

836 F.2d 850 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 19, 1988

In such instances, “the anomaly” of the carrying vessel in effect bearing a portion of its own cargo’s damages notwithstanding its statutory immunity from cargo claims “is sharpened by the fact that, if it alone had been … For our purposes, the only significant thing, which is clearly established, is that Travelers’ Rule F bond was in an amount significantly lower than the total judgment in favor of the United States *852 and against Ta Chi

United States v. Ramsey

353 F.2d 650 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 12, 1965

The answer to that question must clearly be ‘yes.’ To this extent, our original judgment is modified. … This is carried forward in Par. 5 outlining the § 1971(e) voting referee appeal procedure: “The Court or such referee shall register or order the registration of all such applicants who meet the standards established by the

Seguin v. Remington Arms

22 F.4th 492 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 6, 2022

A literal application of §60(B) would render a gun manufacturer immune from liability when it sells a firearm that can, because of a defective trigger-firing-pin design, discharge autonomously (without a trigger … dissent from the majority’s decision to certify a question to the Louisiana Supreme Court, rather than applying that court’s already developed precedents dealing with statutes leading to absurd consequences and that clearly

State of Texas and Texas Department of Human Resources v. United States of America and U.S. Department of Agriculture

951 F.2d 645 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 28, 1992

Postal Service employees stealing food stamps that had been mailed by the Texas Department of Human Services to qualified households. These losses are referred to as mail issuance losses. … The FNS adopted regulations establishing a tolerance level of .05% above which the participating state is held strictly liable for mail issuance losses.

Sport Supply Group, Inc. v. Columbia Casualty Co.

335 F.3d 453 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 7, 2003

The Macgregor label would not, by itself, appear to serve as a “marketing device[] designed to induce the public to patronize” establishments with Macgregor products. … See, e.g., First State Bank, 851 S.W.2d at 922 (describing the Texas Supreme Court’s definition of “advertising” as “very broad” and concluding that “the term clearly includes the posting of notices in public places”).

United States v. Charles Randell Greer

158 F.3d 228 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 16, 1998

Thus, the mere fact that a defendant suffers from a personality disorder does not make him immune to a § 3C1.1 enhancement. … A skeptic might argue that attempts that cannot possibly succeed do not qualify as "attempts" under the substantive criminal law.

United States v. Ho

94 F.3d 932 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 29, 1996

Based upon the facts adduced during the suppression hearing, the district court’s finding that Ho voluntarily consented to the search is not clearly erroneous. . … A consent which waives Fourth Amendment rights may be limited, qualified, or withdrawn. Mason, 557 F.2d at 428-29 . . Officer Simone testified: Q.

Coble v. Dretke

417 F.3d 508 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 18, 2005

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.

Martin v. Medtronic, Inc.

254 F.3d 573 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 18, 2001

Qualified experts review each application and prepare a report and recommendation. The FDA then has six months to accept or reject the application. See 21 U.S.C. § 360e; Stamps v. … Although not part of the holding of Lohr, a majority of the justices in Lohr clearly agreed with this proposition.

Sickles v. City of New Orleans

80 F. 868 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 12, 1897

Under the same law, there was a well-recognized distinction between the mode (or charge) and the condition as affecting donations, .and this distinction is clearly stated in De Pontalba v. New Orleans, 3 La. … The donation was qualified as follows: ‘Which he gives wholly and gratuitously to you, in order that the lepers, of whom there is a large number at present, may be harbored, and in order that the public may perpetually enjoy

United States v. Christopher Landreneau

967 F.3d 443 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 22, 2020

The burden of establishing a “fair and just reason” for withdrawing a guilty plea remains at all times with the defendant. United States v. … Findings of fact for sentencing purposes need only be established by a preponderance of the evidence. United States v. Hebert, 813 F.3d 551, 560 (5th Cir. 2015).

United States v. Eugene Thompson

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 19, 2013

It is true that Haynes establishes only that no Supreme Court decision “clearly established” the rule advanced by Thompson. … Because AEDPA’s20 limitation of “clearly established” Supreme Court precedent does not apply to our review on direct appeal, we could adopt the Haynes panel’s reasoning in the instant case.

National Labor Relations Board v. South Central Bell Telephone Company

688 F.2d 345 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 2, 1982

This power shall not be affected by any other means of adjustment or prevention that has been or may be established by agreement, law, or otherwise.” … from evaluation under Spielberg or other criteria established by the Board.

National Labor Relations Board v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.

161 F.2d 798 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 21, 1947

Co2igress does not seem to have kept the distinction as to what is judicial power and what is administrative power very clearly in-mind. … approximately a dozen employee witnesses, was an irresponsible, incorrigible worry-wart, but who, to the Examiner and the Board, was a member of the Union and privileged to be all that these employees considered him to he, yet immune

United States v. McElwee

646 F.3d 328 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 12, 2011

The Guidelines provide that a fine shall be imposed “in all cases,” except where the defendant establishes an inability to pay. The burden of establishing an inability to pay is on the defendant. United States v. … Chriss bears the burden of establishing that she is entitled to the adjustment.

Moreno v. Brownlee

85 F. App'x 23 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 7, 2004

A plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of discrimination by showing: (1) he belongs to a protected class; (2) he was subjected to an adverse employment decision; (3) he was qualified for the position held or sought … The district court, however, in also dismissing this claim, found that Moreno’s carpal tunnel syndrome does not qualify as a “disability” under the ADA, and thus he failed to establish a prima facie case. 2

Ronald Chisom v. Buddy Roemer

853 F.2d 1186 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 14, 1988

A divided motions panel of this court expedited the appeal and stayed the injunction to the extent it related to the qualifying activities of candidates. 850 F.2d 1051 (5th Cir.1988). … To the extent this is a factual finding by the trial court, we view it as clearly erroneous; to the extent it is a conclusion of law, we view it as erroneous.

Amanda Beech v. Hercules Drilling Co., L.L.C.

691 F.3d 566 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 15, 2012

Id.2 We explained that the course of employment issue “must be analyzed within the framework of established agency principles.” Id. at 1199-1200. … Fleshing out that standard, the court explained that “regardless of how individual courts have stated the tests, in order for an activity to qualify as being within the scope of employment, it must be a necessary incident