Case law

Riddley v. Coopersurgical, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Texas · Oct 23, 2024

As Plaintiff points out in the Responses to each of Defendants’ Motions, this was clearly the result of careful drafting, (ECF 24 at 1, 6; ECF 26 at 1; and ECF 28 at 1, 8). … Despite these multiple forms of preemption by the MDA, courts have been clear that the law does not result in complete immunity for federally-regulated medical device companies.

Taylor v. Sterrett

344 F. Supp. 411 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 5, 1972

. § 1983 to redress any deprivation, under color of state law, of any right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution. … The Novak case is clearly distinguishable from the situation at the Dallas jail.

Liberty Insurance Corporation v. Arch Insurance Company

District Court, N.D. Texas · May 14, 2021

That notice was clearly untimely and prejudicial to TIG as a matter of law.° That L.0,. … Clearly, coverage is excluded.

McNett v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 27, 2021

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, noting that the record contained a vast amount of evidence establishing that the claimant had a back problem but not clearly establishing the effect that condition had on his … On this record, such prejudice has been established, and remand is required. B.

Aviall Services, Inc. v. COOPER INDUSTRIES, LLC

694 F. Supp. 2d 567 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 5, 2010

Further, the court clearly understood the distinction between “hazardous waste” and “solid waste” and therefore used “solid waste” intentionally. … The Court held that “[t]hese kinds of activities are recoverable costs of response clearly distinguishable from litigation expenses.” Id.

Sotonwa v. McDonough

District Court, N.D. Texas · Oct 28, 2024

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination based on any of the protected characteristics under Title VII, the plaintiff must show “that he (1) is a member of a protected class; (2) was qualified for the position; … In response, the plaintiff contends that he is qualified for the position, that he was replaced by someone outside of his protected class, and that he can establish the final element in his prima facie case because he did

Carter v. Countrywide Credit Industries, Inc.

189 F. Supp. 2d 606 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 6, 2002

411 U.S. 279 , 93 S.Ct. 1614 , 36 L.Ed.2d 251 (1973), which held that a group of Missouri state employees could not sue their employer, the state of Missouri, in federal court under the FLSA due to the state’s sovereign immunity … implicating the situation in which an employee agrees to have his FLSA claim processed in an arbitral, rather than a judicial, forum; rather, the Court means that an employee and employer cannot contract around the FLSA to establish

Hall Dadeland Towers Associates v. Hardeman

736 F. Supp. 1422 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 8, 1990

Agency The Hall Plaintiffs’ position on their obligation to reassign Partnership interests is clearly at odds with Mikulin’s representation of HSC’s reassignment obligations. … locate other qualified offerees.”

Jenny Smith, also known as Jerry Wayne Smith v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al.

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 29, 2026

for sua sponte dismissal of a complaint, or any part of it, if the Court finds it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … Valleta, 157 F.4th 201, 213-17 (2d Cir. 2025) (discussing “the absence of clearly established law supporting [transgender prisoner’s] gender-dysphoria claims.”).

Vodicka v. Ermatinger

District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 1, 2022

They further contend that the doctrine of qualified immunity bars Vodicka’s recovery for any constitutional violation and that the claim is barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Id. at 11-12. … Amendment rights because neither the community caretaking nor the emergency aid exception justified the warrantless entry, and (2) genuine issues of material fact existed about whether the officers were entitled to the qualified-immunity

Antoine-Tubbs v. Local 513, Air Transport Division, Transport Workers Union

50 F. Supp. 2d 601 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 22, 1998

Plaintiff presents no evidence as to the requirements or qualifications of the jobs, or of the qualifications she possessed compared to the individuals who were ultimately hired, or that she was in fact qualified for either … While the comments and conduct identified by Tubbs are clearly improper, the court finds that Tubbs’ claim of hostile work environment fails for two reasons.

Hill v. Enchantment Hotels, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 16, 2024

To establish a Title VII discrimination case, a plaintiff must “prove her claim either through direct evidence, statistical proof, or the test established by the Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. … Second, Hill was qualified for her position, a “great employee” with no history of disciplinary issues. (Pl.’s Cmpl. ¶¶ 10, 17, ECF No. 1).

Richards

District Court, N.D. Texas · May 12, 2026

The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing subject-matter jurisdiction. See Ramming, 281 F.3d at 161. B. … “The Eleventh Amendment bars an individual from suing a state in federal court unless the state consents to suit or Congress has clearly and validly abrogated the state’s sovereign immunity.” Perez v. Region 20 Educ.

Irfan Mazher v. Marco Rubio, Secretary of State

District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 11, 2025

The noncitizen visa applicant bears the burden of establishing that he or she is eligible to receive a visa. See 8 U.S.C. § 1361. … “Congress may delegate to executive officials the discretionary authority to admit noncitizens ‘immune from judicial inquiry or interference.’” Id. at 907-08 (quoting Harisiades v.

Bruckner Truck Sales, Inc. v. Guzman

District Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 12, 2023

Rather, Plaintiff effectively assumes that all loans made — regardless of the borrower’s actual eligibility — are “covered loans” that immediately qualify the borrower for forgiveness. … It is well established that “Congress can be presumed to be aware of relevant administrative interpretations when enacting or amending a statute,” Duarte v.

Price v. Santander Consumer USA Inc

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 12, 2019

Accordingly, based on Declaration I, these documents qualify as business records. See FED. R. EVID. 803(6). … Nonetheless, “[t]he weight of authority clearly supports dismissal of the case when all of the issues raised in the district court must be submitted to arbitration.” Alford v.

Khan v. AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan No 3

District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 23, 2022

When a party bears the burden of proof on an issue, he “must establish beyond peradventure all of the essential elements of the claim or defense to warrant judgment in his favor.” Fontenot v. … An ERISA plan abuses its discretion when the decision “is not based on evidence, even if disputable, that clearly supports the basis for its denial.” Schexnayder v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins.

Smith v. FCA U.S., LLC

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 29, 2020

Nicastro, 564 U.S. 873, 887 (2011) (requiring a defendant to “invoke or benefit from the protection of [the forum’s] laws” to establish personal jurisdiction). … Like in similar cases, Decedent’s accident, which occurred in the proposed transferee forum, qualifies as a substantial part of the events giving rise to Plaintiff’s claim. See Ortiz v.

United HealthCare Services Inc v. Synergen Health LLC

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 26, 2023

Adams is qualified to opine on that question. Synergen presses two counterarguments. 31 Huss v. Gayden, 571 F.3d 442, 452 (5th Cir. 2009) (cleaned up). 32 Smith v. … “Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a) . . . provides that the district judge shall modify or set aside any portion of the magistrate judge’s order that is clearly erroneous or is contrary to law.”66 “[T]he court reviews

Basham v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 4, 2025

The plaintiff bears the initial burden of establishing a disability through the first four steps of Admin. R. 23. … First, she contends that the ALJ’s mental RFC finding is not supported by substantial evidence because “the record does not clearly establish how [Plaintiff’s] mental conditions impact her ability to perform work, and