Case law

Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. Verex Assur., Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 9, 1995

These findings show the failure of conditions precedent, and we cannot say that they are clearly erroneous. … Finding no support in the record, we agree with THA that this finding must be deemed clearly erroneous.

Johnson v. Chesapeake Louisiana, L.P.

87 F.4th 305 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 27, 2023

The Commissioner of Conservation, for the prevention of waste and to avoid the drilling of unnecessary wells, is vested with authority to establish a drilling unit for each pool of underground oil or gas. B.A. … Therefore, the phrase ‘without authority’ clearly eliminates negotiorum gestio as a basis for liability among co-owners.”).

Natl Rifle Assn of America Inc v. Steven Mc

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 21, 2013

Moreover, in order to qualify for a license, an applicant must, among other things, be “at least 21 years of age” and “fully qualified under applicable federal and state law to purchase a handgun.”1 Id. § 411.172(a). … The parties seeking access to federal court bear the burden of establishing their standing. Time Warner Cable, Inc. v. Hudson, 667 F.3d 630, 635 (5th Cir. 2012).

United States v. Wilkes

946 F.2d 1143 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 12, 1991

argues that the "Service Center Notice," which was the only document the estate admits to having received from the IRS, provided neither a description of the "error alleged" nor "an explanation thereof," thereby failing to qualify … Instead, the suit could only be one to recover an erroneous refund, which the two-year statute of limitations prohibited. 40 Rodriguez and Young establish the principle that as a taxpayer makes payment against a tax assessment

U.S. v. Flores

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 23, 1993

Following this description, the opinion concludes by stating: "In the light of all of the foregoing circumstances, we conclude that the trustworthiness of Fred's statements is clearly established by … Alternatively, the State could have tried Thomas separately and granted him immunity from the use of his inculpatory testimony against petitioner. . . .

Solomon v. Suggs

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 21, 2000

The District Court’s Submission of Qualified Immunity to the Jury Solomon argues that the district court erred in submitting the issue of qualified immunity to the jury. … The issue of qualified immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court before trial. Snyder v.

Caracci v. C.I.R.

456 F.3d 444 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 11, 2006

Id. at § 4958(b). 36 Whether the transfer of Sta-Home's assets qualifies as an "economic benefit" depends on the fair market value of the companies' assets and liabilities. … The parties agree that the Tax Court clearly erred in including the $1.78 million in "bonus" money as an intangible asset.

Kathryn Baumeister v. AIG Global Investment Corp.

420 F. App'x 351 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 29, 2011

We can infer pretext if the plaintiff was “clearly better qualified than the employee[]” who was not laid off.5 But aside from the fact that Baumeister had more tenure in the High Yield Group (and with AIGGIC in gen- eral … A reasonable jury would not be able to find on this evidence that Bau- meister was “clearly” better qualified than Parry. C.

Willie Albert Smith v. Lee Roy Black, Commissioner, Mississippi Department of Corrections

904 F.2d 950 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 24, 1990

Again, this is only an assertion that the material’s revelation would have been immaterial to the outcome, as impeachment material is clearly exculpatory and qualifies as Brady material. United States v. … Each juror responded clearly and unmistakably. The question and the means of answer satisfy Witherspoon and the issue of counsel’s ineffectiveness. 5.

Daves v. Dallas County

64 F.4th 616 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 31, 2023

The district court deduced, “for an alternative mechanism to press federal claims in state court to qualify as adequate, it must be timely.” (emphasis original). … It is a categorical statement, not qualified by earlier detailed factual background.

Carr v. Johnson

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 16, 2002

As Carr has not shown that the defendants violated a clearly established federal statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known, see Hart v. … O’Brien, 127 F.3d 424, 441 (5th Cir. 1997), he has not shown that the district court erred in concluding that the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from suit. This contention is frivolous too.

United States v. Larremore

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 14, 2025

Considering its context, we cannot say that this factual finding is clearly erroneous. … The evidence fails to establish that Deputy Colona touched the truck to discover information.

Sobley v. Southern Natural Gas Co.

302 F.3d 325 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 13, 2002

Clearly, the law of Mississippi does not allow the imposition of punitive damages for mere negligence or clerical mistake. This case, however, rises above simple negligence or clerical mistake. … Moreover, there was testimony—later qualified to some degree—from State Farm’s representative Rick McEuen that neither the electrolysis nor the earth movement exclusion would bar coverage for the claimed carpet and tile

United States v. O'Brien

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 25, 1994

The district court also justified its departure because it viewed O'Brien's criminal activity as "clearly atypical." … O'Brien's conduct in this case does not qualify as a "spontaneous and seemingly thoughtless" act.

Texas Life, Accident, Health & Hospital Service Insurance Guaranty Ass'n v. Gaylord Entertainment Co.

105 F.3d 210 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 27, 1997

is a plan established to provide retirement income or to enable savings for retirement. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(2). … A state law which has the effect of assigning an ERISA cause of action clearly is connected with and relates to an ERISA plan.

Yoder Brothers, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross v. California-Florida Plant Corporation, Defendants-Appellees-Crossappellants. California-Florida Plant Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees-Crossappellants v. Yoder Brothers, Inc., Defendant-Appellant-Cross

537 F.2d 1347 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 7, 1976

They entered the marked in 1957, at a time when Yoder was clearly the largest of the propagator-distributors. … We have decided that it failed to meet that burden and thereby to qualify itself for the pre-existing cost plus contract exception.

Rivet v. Regions Bank of Louisiana, F.S.B.

108 F.3d 576 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 13, 1997

Accordingly, we conclude that the first element of claim preclusion is clearly satisfied in this case with respect to all four plaintiffs and to defendants Regions and FSA. 51 2. … As a result, we concluded that the well-pleaded complaint doctrine did not immunize that second suit from removal.

Irving Sulmeyer and Arnold L. Kupetz, Co-Trustees in Bankruptcy for Bubble Up Corporation v. Coca Cola Company

515 F.2d 835 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 11, 1975

Coca Cola determined which bottlers qualified for the IMP in a given area. … Sprite clearly did not have monopoly power at the consumer level, and Bubble Up does not claim otherwise.

24 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1, 24 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 31,368 Thomas Johnson, Individually, and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Uncle Ben's, Inc.

628 F.2d 419 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 17, 1980

Plaintiffs' counsel failed to offer other available evidence that contained the 1974 data that would have established a prima facie case of discrimination. … If it hires laterally, the relevant comparison is to the general or qualified outside labor force. If Uncle Ben's fills jobs by promotion, the relevant comparison, as we recognized in James v.

Shufang Li v. Eric Holder, Jr.

579 F. App'x 225 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 18, 2012

Li argues that she “clearly qualifies as a ‘refugee’ on account of a protected ground.” … Li, who is proceeding pro se, asserts generally that future persecution must be presumed when past persecution has been established.