Case law

United Industrial Workers of Seafarers International Union of North America v. Board of Trustees of Galveston Wharves

400 F.2d 320 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 8, 1968

The City of Galveston, owner and operator of the elevator facilities, is a sovereign arm of the State of Texas and is therefore immune from the application of that Act. 32 The ultimate issue, then, is the applicability of … The court concluded that the Company had not established noncompliance with the provisions of the Act by the Union, and denied relief.

Jesus Paras Liwanag v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

872 F.2d 685 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 28, 1989

Sec. 1153 (a)(2) allows the issuance of immigrant visas to qualified persons who are "the spouses, unmarried sons or unmarried daughters" of aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence 2 The dissent suggests that we … As Judge Reinhardt noted, "[t]he intent of Congress in amending the section was not to enable the BIA to deport an individual, like Start, who clearly qualified for relief."

Alfredo G. Parrish, Etc. v. Board of Commissioners of the Alabama State Bar, Etc., Alabama Black Lawyers Association v. Board of Commissioners of the Alabama State Bar, Etc.

533 F.2d 942 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 21, 1976

Any rule, regulation or law limiting the number of times that any person, otherwise qualified may apply for and stand the Alabama bar examination at any regular examination session is hereby prohibited. … can hardly be supposed that if such a showing resulted from a perusal of these examinations then the case would be ripe for summary judgment on motion of the defendants. 33 Finally, the fact that the defendants required a clearly

United States v. Benito Sanchez-Rodriguez

830 F.3d 168 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 8, 2016

Considering, as we must, the “‘least culpable’ means of violating the statute of conviction,” Rodriguez-Negrete, 772 F.3d at 225, Glenn clearly establishes that a defendant need have no specific intent in order to be found … Sanchez-Rodriguez must also demonstrate “a realistic probability, not a theoretical possibility,” that Florida “would apply its statute to conduct falling outside the generic definition” in order to establish error on the

Methane Awareness v. USA

173 F.3d 323 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 19, 1999

, used, re-established, or renewed.” 41 C.F.R. § 101-6.1015(a) (1997). … MARG contends that, because the regulations do not permit retroactive re-establishment, see supra note 10, BSC was not properly re- established until April 9, 1997, and that, even if retroactive re- establishment were permitted

Lawson v. Excel Contractors

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 2, 2022

A plaintiff can establish pretext “by showing that: (1) ‘a discriminatory reason more likely motivated’ the employer; (2) the employer’s ‘reason is unworthy of credence’; or (3) he ‘is “clearly better qualified” … As an initial matter, Lawson was not clearly the better qualified candidate. Lawson had been in the industry longer than Anderson, but both candidates met Excel’s minimum competency requirements.

Jarriod Scott v. Weber Aircraft

609 F. App'x 788 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 17, 2015

On appeal, Scott raises a number of arguments, but his claims sound most clearly in retaliation. … The only events that might qualify as “protected activity” are Scott’s reports regarding the noose and the offensive publication.

Texas Capital Bank N.A. v. Dallas Roadster, Ltd. (In Re Dallas Roadster, Ltd.)

846 F.3d 112 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 17, 2017

We hold that the district court did not clearly err in finding that Roadster committed multiple material breaches. … Thus, the district court’s finding was not clearly erroneous. See Env’t Tex. Citizen Lobby, Inc. v.

Anthony Chapple v. Texas Hlth and Human Svc Cmsn

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 20, 2019

Despite his years of service in that position, this court has held that an applicant’s “better education, work experience, and longer tenure with the company do not establish that he is clearly better qualified.” … On such a record, it does not appear that Chapple can be characterized as “clearly better qualified.”

Hornsby Oil Company, Inc., Cross-Appellant v. Champion Spark Plug Company, Inc., Cross-Appellee

714 F.2d 1384 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 19, 1983

Distributors who aggressively promote the sale of Champion plugs to qualified jobbers or wholesaler accounts are also entitled to a warehouse allowance. … Albeit charged on plaintiff’s theory of market definition with respect to the section 2 claim, the jury was given no guidance in assessing the operation of the challenged restraint “in relationship to a clearly defined market

Gunn v. Chickasaw County, MS

166 F.3d 341 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 21, 1998

These districts must necessarily be drawn based on race in order to qualify as majority-black districts. … Because it was plausible that the plaintiffs established these two critical factors based on the record as a whole, the district court did not clearly err.

Ralph Whitley v. BP, P.L.C.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 4, 2016

. §§ 1001-1461, protects participants in voluntarily established, private sector retirement plans. … It does this “by establishing standards of conduct, responsibility, and obligation for fiduciaries of employee benefit plans.” 29 U.S.C. § 1001(b).

United States v. Chikenna Jones

733 F.3d 574 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 28, 2013

“The defendant can establish a prima facie non-frivolous double jeopardy claim through indictments or other documentation to establish the earlier charges, or even through his own testimony.” United States v. … The record in the Ngari case clearly establishes the earlier charges.

William C. Davis v. Ernest L. Parker

58 F.3d 183 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 17, 1995

(1) that “[t]here is no evidence that the legislature intended *188 by R.S. 9:5628 to curb any type of litigation other than traditional medical malpractice actions,” id. at 215; and (2) that “because the statute grants immunities … Relative nullity may be invoked only by those persons for whose interest the ground of nullity was established, and may not be declared by the court on its own initiative. Art. 2032.

Mississippi Gay Alliance and Anne Debary v. Bill Goudelock

536 F.2d 1073 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 12, 1976

This latter holding, if indeed it is that, is clearly and absolutely wrong. … With respect, I can only submit again that I think the majority is clearly wrong.) Part III of the plurality opinion in Young v.

United States v. David Israel Namer

835 F.2d 1084 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 4, 1988

We are bound to accept the factual findings of the district court, unless we deem them clearly erroneous. Based on those findings, for the reasons assigned, we affirm. … Namer contends that “collateral estoppel operates to bar the introduction or argumentation of certain facts necessarily established in a prior proceeding.” United States v.

United States v. Andrew Carmen Menichino

497 F.2d 935 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 29, 1974

First, although he was advised of his right to counsel and his right to remain silent, the warning was a qualified one, since he was told that counsel would be available only after the “biographical” was taken and processing … In Ramos, no remand was required since the record, clearly reveal [ed] that neither of the defendants voluntarily initiated further conversations subsequent to their refusal to sign a waiver form.

United States v. Glynn Batson, South Plains Land Corporation, a Corporation, and Johnny Lemmons, United States of America v. Dale Leverett, Cletus Leverett and Wayne Leverett, United States of America v. Lois Prather, United States of America v. T.A. Wartes, Wayne Hicks, Bill Wartes and Gene Irwin, United States of America v. A. Earl Jones, United States of America v. Don H. Wilson, United States of America v. Earl Bowman, Ernest L. Bowman, J.E. Aldridge, Don Carmichael and Estate of Everett M. Bowman

706 F.2d 657 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 9, 1983

As a result, they "did not qualify as a separate person for limitation purposes (i.e., were not eligible for any program payments)." … Clearly, the applicable statute of limitations is section 714b(c), as the district court found. See note 21, supra.

United States v. Broussard

669 F.3d 537 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Feb 1, 2012

At the sentencing, furthermore, Broussard confirmed that he “had mentioned” setting up meetings with some girls under age eighteen to have sex with them, but qualified his answer by stating that it was “just talk” and “all … The sentencing transcript clearly indicates that the court’s error affected Broussard’s substantial rights.

Migis v. Pearle Vision Inc

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Mar 10, 1998

The calculation of attorney’s fees involves a well- established process. … And, it is more than well- - 21 - established that “a finding is clearly erroneous when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with