Case law

Skipworth v. Reverse Mortgage Solutions Inc

District Court, N.D. Texas · Oct 4, 2022

To qualify as a consumer under the DTPA, “a person must have sought or acquired goods or services by purchase or lease,” and “the goods and services purchased or leased must form the basis of the complaint.” … “The elements are not clearly defined and the conduct deemed to constitute an unreasonable collection effort varies from case to case.” Id.

Jones

District Court, N.D. Texas · Nov 21, 2025

against a government entity or employee if the court determines that the complaint is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Although Johnson claims to not be suing Jones based upon his capacity as a supervisor, he clearly attempts to state such a claim, alleging that Jones “as supervisor being made aware he could’ve stop[ped] the torture”.

Nursery Decals and More Inc v. Neat Print Inc

District Court, N.D. Texas · Oct 22, 2021

There being no other basis on which to find a live controversy, the case is clearly moot.” Id. at 100. … Therefore, the Court concludes that Neat Print has not established that this element fails as a matter of law.

Deleon

District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 9, 2026

Bellah examined Plaintiff only on one occasion, he does not qualify as a treating physician for purposes of the Social Security regulations. See Robinson v. Astrue, 271 F. App’x 394, 396 (5th Cir. 2008). … District courts in this circuit have refused to remand a case for the award of benefits if a claimant did not meet “the very high burden of establishing ‘disability without any doubt.’”

Bank of America NA v. Ztar Mobile Inc

District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 27, 2025

We have previously held that a condition precedent to contract formation is ‘clearly’ evidenced where an agreement unequivocally provides that a party does not intend to be bound until the execution of a final contract. … explanation, the email statement that Haddad relies on – that BANA “can remove” the personal guarantee, a statement made during the parties’ negotiations and months before the written agreement was executed – does not qualify

Scoggins v. Williams

District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 3, 2023

First, federal court may grant relief if the state court adjudicated a constitutional claim contrary to federal law, or unreasonably applied clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme … independent claim before it may be used to establish cause for procedural default.’”

United States v. Ajayi

District Court, N.D. Texas · Oct 4, 2021

“The judicial contempt power is a potent weapon” that should not be used unless a specific aspect of the court’s order has been “clearly violated.” Piggly Wiggly Clarksville, Inc. v. Mrs. … The evidence does not establish conduct by Defendant that violates the October 2019 Order or March 2020 Order under the applicable standard.

Le v. United States of America

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 24, 2023

Le’s quadriplegia, and likely because their expert’s trial testimony clearly precludes that theory, they now focus on Dr. … But that is true, he qualifies, only “if” the intra-operative flip—which he admits met the standard of care—didn’t render Mr. Le a permanent quadriplegic instantaneously, which he says is “possible.” Thus, Dr.

Shelton v. Parkland Health

District Court, N.D. Texas · May 28, 2025

In its Objections, Parkland first asserts that it is clearly appropriate for courts to take judicial notice of matters of public record, including a charge of discrimination in ruling on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss … As Parkland cites no case law to show that a medical condition or impairment such as this does not qualify as a disability, the court declines to address this issue in any more detail and concludes that Parkland has failed

Williams v. Director, TDCJ-CID

District Court, N.D. Texas · May 21, 2021

Johnson, 108 F.3d 554, 558 n.4 (5th Cir. 1997) (holding AEDPA clearly places the burden on a federal habeas petitioner to raise and litigate as fully as possible his federal claims in state court). … Instead of furnishing this court with these types of specific information (some of which would likely have qualified for inclusion in an ex parte motion because of its potentially confidential nature), Williams continues

Rotstain v. Trustmark National Bank

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 20, 2022

Thus, extending DSCC as the Defendants advocate would effectively immunize any entity under the control of a Ponzi schemer from liability for violations of the TSA. … TD Bank also had clear insight into the destination of funds wired out of this account, which clearly indicated that SIBL directed the bulk of incoming funds to paying earlier investors, an obvious hallmark of a Ponzi

Baker v. Walters

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

But, although what qualifies as reasonabl[y] particular surely depends at least in part on the circumstances of each case, a discovery request should be sufficiently definite and limited in scope that it can … To their credit, Defendants produced a Declaration of Trust Establishing Camellia Trust (the “Trust Agreement”) which confirmed that Mr.

Romo v. Waste Connections US Inc.

District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 9, 2019

“A plan administrator abuses its discretion where the decision is not based on evidence, even if disputable, that clearly supports the basis for its denial.” Holland v. Int’l Paper Co. Ret. … App. 64.12 The President’s Award also 12“Cliff vesting is the process by which employees earn the right to receive full benefits from their company’s qualified retirement plan account at a specified date, rather than becoming

Mims v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. Texas · Nov 8, 2024

The Sequential Evaluation Process “In order to qualify for disability insurance benefits or [supplemental security income], a claimant must suffer from a disability.” … at 20), her argument is meritless, as the record states, “Strength 5/5 in all extremities,” which clearly includes the hands. (Tr. 827.) Finally, the ALJ found Dr.

Helmerich & Payne International Drilling Co v. Nabors Drilling Technologies USA Inc

District Court, N.D. Texas · May 26, 2022

, and plans” qualify as critical information as described in the ’593 patent. … And as discussed, there is no support in the specification establishing any particular criteria—such as efficiency, speed, or length—as optimization parameters, and as Mr.

Micheaux

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

include “(1) whether material issues of fact are at issue; (2) whether there has been substantial prejudice; (3) whether grounds for default are -11- clearly … Bank qualifies as a “mortgagee” under Chapter 51 of the Texas Property Code. See TEX. PROP. CODE § 51.0025; Dkt. No. 62 at 12-14.

Vodicka v. Ermatinger

District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 26, 2020

action against “[e]very person who, under the color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage . . . subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen . . . to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … “To state a claim under [§] 1983, a plaintiff must: (1) allege a violation of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, and (2) 8 Dallas County does not clearly include other Defendants in its motion

United States of America v. Dental Health Programs Inc

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 8, 2020

No. 37, ¶ 357(a), (c)–(h)).3 Clearly, DQ LLC did not own CDC; the Second Amended Complaint makes clear that CDC’s sole member was DQCG. … diversity, OSHA, fire drills, etc.; (7) failing to provide an organizational structure, lines of responsibility, job performance evaluations, and job descriptions for each position; (8) providing immunizations

United States of America v. Kinder Morgan CO2 Company LP

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 30, 2020

As the exemplars establish, these leases acknowledge the Government’s ownership of and right to extract helium from gas streams produced from federal lands. … Relator confuses the terms “extract” and “produce” which is critical in establishing liability under the relevant federal statutes, regulations, and leases.

Caliber Home Loans Inc v. Cove

District Court, N.D. Texas · May 7, 2024

Cardinal asserts that “Caliber’s central claim is misappropriation of trade secrets, but Caliber refuses to identify its trade secrets with reasonable particularity”; that, “[w]ithout a clearly … And Cardinal reports that “Caliber then points to several general categories of ‘secret’ information without disclosing any specific information that allegedly qualifies as a trade secret” and without tying “any