Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
1,742 results
1.63s
Kennard v. Orphan of Immagation lies or
District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 27, 2024
And “[i]t is well-established that a district court may dismiss a complaint on its own motion under [Rule] 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may granted.” Starrett v. U.S. … A review of Kennard’s filing reflects that it presents allegations that qualify as clearly baseless, irrational, or wholly incredible, requiring dismissal of the construed complaint with prejudice.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · May 17, 2023
were “similar incidents” to establish a pattern. … And while Jenkins has established he was qualified for the Supervisor II position, see supra Section III.B, the Court still cannot plausibly find his employment record “does not support the adverse action.” See id.
Cited 0 timesUnknownTubbs v. Fort Worth Police Association
District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 23, 2024
And “[i]t is well-established that a district court may dismiss a complaint on its own motion under [Rule] 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may granted.” Starrett v. U.S. … A review of Tubbs’s filing reflects that it presents allegations that qualify as clearly baseless, irrational, or wholly incredible, requiring dismissal of the construed complaint with prejudice.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 16, 2022
A decision is contrary to clearly established federal law if the state court arrives at a conclusion opposite to that reached by the United States Supreme Court on a question of law or if the state court decides a case … A state court decision will be an unreasonable application of clearly established precedent if it correctly identifies the applicable rule but applies it objectively unreasonably to the facts of the case.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 10, 2026
Speigel, Inc., 708 F.2d 233, 237 (6th Cir. 1983) (“The mere fact that each of these men was a manager . . . is clearly insufficient to establish that matters bearing upon Hill’s discharge were within the scope of their employment … To establish a prima facie case of discrimination based on a disability under the ADA, Tran must show that (1) she suffers from a disability or is regarded as disabled; (2) she is qualified for the job despite the disability
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · May 14, 2026
And “[i]t is well-established that a district court may dismiss a complaint on its own motion under [Rule] 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may granted.” Starrett v. U.S. … A review of Marshall’s filing reflects that the complaint presents claims and allegations that qualify as clearly baseless, irrational, or wholly incredible, requiring dismissal with prejudice.
Cited 0 timesUnknown103 F. Supp. 2d 909 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 23, 2000
Rules of procedure are established to facilitate the just resolution of substantive rights. … Indeed, NAF boasts an impressive assembly of qualified arbitrators.
Cited 50 timesPublished648 F. Supp. 1061 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 12, 1986
Each applicant must be qualified under Section 41A-5 and each applicant shall be considered a licensee if a license is granted. … package”); id. at 26 (Palmer: "clearly, I think that the intent of this ordinance is to reduce crime.
Reversed in part, on other grounds by FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of Dallas, 493 U.S. 215 (1990)Cited 32 timesPublishedPerricone v. City of Mineral Wells, Texas
District Court, N.D. Texas · Nov 8, 2023
Although the Texas UDJA appears to contain a limited waiver of immunity, Plaintiff must still establish standing. … —Dallas 2013, no. pet) (explaining that the Texas UDJA “waives governmental immunity against claims that a statute or ordinance is invalid” but “does not waive immunity against claims seeking a declaration of the claimant
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 26, 2020
Whether Sovereign Immunity Bars Plaintiffs’ Malicious Prosecution Claim The Court concludes that sovereign immunity bars Aubrey’s malicious prosecution claim against City of Dallas. … tort for which the Texas state legislature has not waived sovereign immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknown704 F. Supp. 715 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Oct 18, 1988
When a sufficient quantity of the antibodies have developed (indicating a good “immune response”), the mouse is killed and the antibody-producing cells (lymphocytes) are removed. … Mankoff had previously contracted with Campbell to establish a legal defense fund for First Western Government Securities tax shelter.
Cited 13 timesPublishedTORRES EX REL. TORRES v. Trinity Industries, Inc.
229 F. Supp. 2d 598 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 22, 2002
The $45.24 per week can only be seen as interest of the kind that is clearly excluded from the FTCA’s general waiver of sovereign immunity. … Unless we expose to public view our failures to follow the court's established procedures, our claim to legitimacy is illegitimate. Grutter v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 15, 2021
A detainee 6 is required to establish that the defendant official has actual subjective knowledge of a substantial risk of serious harm but responds with … Such a finding of deliberate indifference, though, “must rest on facts clearly evincing ‘wanton’ actions on the parts of the defendants.” Johnson v. Treen, 759 F.2d 1236, 1238 (5th Cir. 1985); see also Wilson v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownSchutt v. Garland Independent School District
District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 9, 2019
GISD asserts that it is entitled to governmental immunity against this claim. Doc. 104, GISD’s Br., 4. The Court agrees. State entities are immune from suit unless the state has waived its immunity. Mission Consol. … Roell must specifically establish that he: (1) is a member of a protected class; (2) was qualified for his position; (3) was subjected to an adverse employment action; and (4) was replaced by someone outside the protected
Cited 0 timesUnknownHighmark, Inc. v. Allcare Health Management Systems, Inc.
706 F. Supp. 2d 713 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 1, 2010
Conversely, in this case Highmark clearly has shown that Allcare’s conduct was not part of normal litigation conduct. … And as the foregoing analysis establishes, those efforts were sorely deficient.
Modified on other grounds by Highmark, Inc. v. Allcare Health Management Systems, Inc., 732 F. Supp. 2d 653 (2010)Cited 5 timesPublishedFreedom Coalition of Doctors for Choice v. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
District Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 5, 2024
Cir. 2002) (FOIA reflects “a general philosophy of full agency disclosure unless information is exempted under clearly delineated statutory language.”). … Because the expedited processing analysis precedes production, no requester could qualify unless he is engaged in disseminating other information.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 16, 2024
And “[i]t is well-established that a district court may dismiss a complaint on its own motion under [Rule] 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may granted.” Starrett v. U.S. … No. 3 at 3 (cleaned up) – reflects that the complaint presents allegations that qualify as clearly baseless, irrational, or wholly incredible, requiring dismissal with prejudice.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 7, 2026
The burden is on the proponent of expert witness testimony to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the testimony is admissible. See Daubert, 509 U.S. at 592 n.10. … Though the cited discovery documents discussing the Amazon Relay App are placed within the “Opinions and Conclusions” section of the report (ECF 283-1 at 234 et seqg.), they are clearly present only to support his associated
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 11, 2026
And “[i]t is well-established that a district court may dismiss a complaint on its own motion under [Rule] 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may granted.” Starrett v. U.S. … A review of Toby’s filing reflects that the complaint presents claims and allegations that qualify as clearly baseless, irrational, or wholly incredible, requiring dismissal with prejudice.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 20, 2023
, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A, 1915(e)(2). … It is clearly established law that prison staff cannot cause the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain. Jd. at 320.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna