Case law

Barrett v. Roberts

551 F.2d 662 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 2, 1977

The appellant contends that Goldberg establishes the right of an eligible welfare recipient to receive benefits without interruption or delay. … The recipient, of course, ceases receiving benefit checks if, as a result of the fair hearing, ineligibility is established. .

Smith v. Christus Saint Michaels Health System

496 F. App'x 468 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Nov 13, 2012

If that were the case, medical practitioners would be immunized from any negligence in every instance where a patient has a more than even chance of dying, regardless of the degree or kind of negligence or how and when the … Under these circumstances, the magistrate judge did not abuse her discretion in concluding that the nurse was not qualified to testify about the side effects of the drug. See Hidden Oaks Ltd. v.

Tracy Steinhauser v. Comcorp of Tyler, Incorporate

586 F. App'x 627 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 24, 2013

Express Corp., 283 F.3d 715, 723 (5th Cir. 2002) (noting that to establish pretext by showing that the plaintiff was clearly better qualified than a competitor selected by the employer, the plaintiff’s “qualifications must … ‘leap from the record and cry out to all who would listen that [s]he was vastly—or even clearly—more qualified for the subject job’” (quoting Odom v.

Canal Barge Co Inc v. Gulfstream Trdg Ltd

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 10, 2000

Nevertheless, Canal Barge attempted to qualify Silloway on those topics; whereupon, Torco objected. The magistrate sustained the objection. … Thus, we are not of the view that custom played a role in necessarily establishing the standard of care.

Lakoski v. James

66 F.3d 751 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 3, 1995

The individual defendants claimed qualified immunity and the University argued that there was no implied private right of action under Title IX for damages for employment discrimination. … The House report accompanying the Act stated: In establishing the applicability of Title VII to State and local employees, the Committee wishes to emphasize 10  that

T v. Ward

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Apr 5, 2000

No. 99-30487 -2- the plaintiffs in that case had alleged a violation of the right to family integrity which was clearly protected by the Constitution. … Accordingly, the defendants may claim the protection of qualified immunity. Appellant’s malicious prosecution claim fails because he was never prosecuted. Kerr v.

United States v. Willis

76 F.4th 467 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 7, 2023

This is not a qualifying justification under Rule 35. … Here, Willis clearly pled guilty to possessing distinct firearms during three distinct timeframes. And he was convicted of and sentenced for each of those distinct units of possession.

Lanier v. Wise County

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 21, 2025

“[M]erely because the words used have sexual content or connotation” does not automatically establish a discriminatory intent. Oncale, 523 U.S. at 80. … Although Akin as an elected sheriff could qualify as an “employer” under Texas Labor Code § 21.002(8)(C) for purposes of a Section 21.051 claim, such a cause of action would run against him solely in his official capacity

United States v. Roy C. Bradfield and Lee Andrew Williams

103 F.3d 1207 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jan 9, 1997

Furthermore, Chancey was driven, to the point of obsession, by the prospect of substantial monetary reward from his contingency fee agreement and was clearly motivated by his pressing financial obligations. … Fifth Circuit, 1990 Edition, General and Preliminary Instruction 1.15, “Accomplice-Informer-Immunity” at 26. 27 . Id. at 20 . 28 . Williamson v.

Trailer Bridge v. LA Intl Marine

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 17, 2026

A factual finding is “clearly erroneous when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” … Moreover, Trailer Bridge’s reading would render the “actual knowledge” requirement established in this court’s case law irrelevant.

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,710 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc.

497 F.2d 473 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 15, 1974

The SEC argued that the scheme qualified as a profit-sharing arrangement, an interest commonly known as a security, and an investment contract. … Clearly the facts presented no issue of how to assess a scheme in which an investor performed mere perfunctory tasks.

Evercore Capital Partners II, L.L.C. v. Nancy Sue Davis Trust

644 F.3d 259 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 16, 2011

In other words, if the securities fraud alleged came from some other source or procedure than disclosure and solicitation, then Section 1125(e) would not provide immunity.”). See also Yell Forestry Prods., Inc. v. … In re National Gypsum clearly sets the standard for this circuit. . Evercore had agreed pre-bankruptcy to purchase the debtors’ assets only to be deterred by the intra-family litigation.

Rajiv Khurana v. Innovative Health Care Systems, Inc. Karry Teel Carl Holden William Malone I.H.S. River Region Hospital of Vacherie, La., Inc.

130 F.3d 143 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Dec 12, 1997

In Shearin , the Third Circuit held that the plaintiffs hiring as window dressing and firing to preserve the fraud both qualified as conspiracy acts for a § 1962(d)-based civil claim. … Shearin’s hiring and firing plausibly constitute overt acts that not only would establish a conspiracy, but in this case were allegedly essential to it.

National Builders & Contractors Insurance v. Slocum Construction, L.L.C.

428 F. App'x 430 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 15, 2011

7  Case: 10-60601 Document: 00511509283 Page: 8 Date Filed: 06/15/2011 No. 10-60601 mentioned by the panel majority in its opinion, but they clearly … Jackson, 583 So.2d 946, 950 (Miss. 1991) (explaining that, if an officer was guilty of negligence, then he did not fall under the “intentional tort” exception of qualified immunity). See also Jordan v.

Spann v. FedEx Freight

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 15, 2025

She was thus clearly aware of these allegations immediately after the incident, which commenced the 180-day period. … To establish a prima facie case of race or sex discrimination based on disparate treatment in the Fifth Circuit, an employee generally must demonstrate that “1) is a member of a protected class; 2) was qualified for her position

United States v. Shah

84 F.4th 190 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Oct 2, 2023

Paragraph 7 clearly provides that the remedy is rebuttal. … But she was not qualified as an expert witness, and the surgeons did not establish that she had personal knowledge of the source of DOL funding.

Carleen Black v. Pan American Laboratories

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jul 12, 2011

According to the Court, Reeves had met his burden of establishing a prima facie case by showing that “(i) at the time he was fired, he was a member of the class protected by the ADEA . . . , (ii) he was otherwise qualified … Harris Cnty., Tex., 197 F.3d 173, 179 (5th Cir. 1999) (“to establish a prima facie case” the plaintiff must “demonstrate that (1) she was not promoted, (2) she was qualified for the position she sought, (3) she was within

Salas v. Southwest Texas Jr. College Dist.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 23, 1992

And, as is more than well established, a finding of fact is clearly erroneous "only when although there may be evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction … The district court's findings concerning the voting rolls were not clearly erroneous.

Amer Heritage Life v. Moore

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 18, 2002

REV. 361, 4 The Green Tree case would have qualified as an “embedded” proceeding under our definition of that term in Altman Nursing. … Because an order compelling arbitration entered in an independent proceeding is a final decision, it also qualifies as a “judgment” under the Anti-Injunction Act. See Sternlight, supra, at 170–77.

Rachel Escamilla v. Pamela Elliott

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Jun 4, 2020

In the context of § 1981 violations by private actors, the Supreme Court has implied 5 a damages remedy to effectuate the declaration of rights contained in that provision because Congress has not established a remedial … Sheriff Elliott is individually liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because free speech is a clearly established constitutional right, which precludes qualified immunity. 50.