Case law

Crane v. Napolitano

920 F. Supp. 2d 724 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 24, 2013

Defendants assert that Finch and Donelon establish that, in the Fifth Circuit, if an alleged violation of one’s oath “is the only consequence that flows from upholding a challenged law, a plaintiff cannot establish standing … Defendants do not dispute that the expenditure of state funds may qualify as an invasion of a legally protected interest sufficient to establish standing under the proper circumstances. See, e.g., Sch.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Microtune, Inc.

258 F.R.D. 310 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 4, 2009

immunity provided by this subdivision.” … The company has not established that “the primary motivating purpose” behind the creation of any of the documents was to aid in possible future litigation.

Chambless v. The State of Texas

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

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. … as clearly baseless, irrational, or wholly incredible.

Odom v. Frank

781 F. Supp. 1191 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Oct 7, 1991

For purposes of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination, Plaintiff must establish that he was a member of a protected group, that he applied for the promotion in issue, that he was qualified for the promotion, and … Plaintiff Odom has established that: a. Plaintiff was clearly better qualified than the selectee for the Prevention Team Leader position in terms of his performance and experience; b.

Patridge v. Runyon

899 F. Supp. 291 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 5, 1995

In order to establish a claim under the Rehabilitation Act, the plaintiff must prove (1) that she is handicapped under the Act, (2) that she is an “otherwise qualified individual,” and (3) that she was excluded from her position … Furthermore, the case law under the Rehabilitation Act clearly shows that the Postal Service is not required to reassign Patridge or to create a new position for her. Alexander v.

Caudillo v. Lubbock Independent School District

311 F. Supp. 2d 550 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 3, 2004

On August 4, 2003, Defendant Clemmons filed his Motion for Summary Judgment and Brief in Support based on qualified immunity. Plaintiffs filed a Response on September 29, 2003. … As stated above, the parties’ respective motions and responses relating to summary judgment on the non-qualified immunity issues are now before this Court and are the subject of this order. 2 Although the parties have not

In Re National Gypsum Co.

139 B.R. 397 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 12, 1992

In this case, the United States has clearly appeared before the bankruptcy court. … Estimation of CERCLA claims is clearly possible in bankruptcy proceedings.

Kimbell v. United States

244 F. Supp. 2d 700 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 16, 2003

For the granting of partial summary judgment to be appropriate, Plaintiff must establish, as a matter of law, that Decedent’s transfer of property to the Partnership qualifies for one of the exceptions. … Although the validity of the Partnership under Texas law can be presumed for the purposes of this Opinion, the facts of this case are clearly distinguishable from Church .

Bombardier Aerospace Corp. v. United States

94 F. Supp. 3d 816 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 20, 2015

This was material because the plaintiff brought suit under § 7422(a), which waives sovereign immunity from refund suits, provided the taxpayer files a qualifying refund claim. See id. at 374. … The government argues that the TAM clearly relies on the actual facts of this case and also clearly advises BAC that the various fees it received from the fractional interest owners in the Flexjet program were subject to

Ahrens v. Perot Systems Corp.

39 F. Supp. 2d 773 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 3, 1999

Ahrens has cited no law which establishes that her second statement cannot be inconsistent because she has never directly denied it; moreover, this is clearly not a requirement under the doctrine of judicial estoppel. … In a RIF case, a prima facie case is established by showing that 1) plaintiff is a member of a protected class; 2) she suffered an adverse employment decision; 3) she was qualified to assume another available position at

Bellinger v. Cagle

685 F. Supp. 142 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 23, 1987

The plaintiffs’ complaint clearly seeks to have this court enjoin the defendants from collecting taxes alleged to be due. … The second, a judicial exception established in Enochs v.

Southland Royalty Co. v. Federal Energy Administration

512 F. Supp. 436 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 11, 1980

The statement nonetheless clearly implied that a reservoir, newly-designated as a “property,” could immediately qualify for stripper treatment based upon the prior production levels of such separate reservoir, See 41 Fed.Reg … Accordingly, FEA made it clear that newly-developed properties must establish a 12-month history of marginal production before they may be treated as stripper well properties.

United States v. Douglas

837 F. Supp. 817 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Oct 7, 1993

Clearly, however, African-Americans have not been systematically excluded from jury service in the Fort Worth division. … CONCLUSION The Court finds that Defendant has failed to establish a prima facie case of a fair cross section violation.

Fairweather v. Giles Dalby Correctional Facility

154 F. Supp. 2d 921 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 30, 2001

“The legal conclusion of ‘deliberate indifference,’ *927 therefore, must rest on facts clearly evincing “wanton’ actions on the part of the defendants.” … This dismissal shall count as a qualifying dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (g) and Ade-pegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383 (5th Cir.1996).

Howard Gault Co. v. Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc.

615 F. Supp. 916 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 7, 1985

This inquiry, applied to this context, turns on whether the unconstitutionality’of the statute was clearly established at the time the action occurred. … The Counter-Defendants in No. 2-80-127 are not entitled to qualified immunity. 4. Counter-Plaintiff Moya is entitled to recover $500 in compensatory damages from the Counter-Defendants in No. 2-80-127. 5.

Sandhu v. Bransom

932 F. Supp. 822 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 1, 1996

Purely legal questions are reviewed de novo by the habeas court, while purely factual questions are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard. Quinn, 783 F.2d at 790-91 . III. … Ground Five: Political Offense Exception Petitioners argue that the offenses that are the subject of the extradition request qualify as political offenses and, therefore, are not extraditable.

Dudley v. United States of America

District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 3, 2020

is available for her claim under the Eighth Amendment; and, (2) even if such a claim is available, Dudley fails to state a claim of a violation of a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time, such that … he is entitled to qualified immunity.

White v. UT Southwestern Medical Center

District Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 28, 2022

Title II provides that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such 6White maintains that UT Southwestern’s sovereign immunity defense is barred by promissory and equitable estoppel. … D White’s ADA Title V claim is barred by sovereign immunity. “Title V itself does not abrogate a state’s sovereign immunity.

Total Rx Care, LLC v. Great Northern Insurance Co.

318 F.R.D. 587 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 7, 2017

immunity provided by this subdivision.” … Plaintiff, therefore, cannot establish waiver.

Clark v. Thompson

District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 11, 2020

. § 1983, which allows Officer Thompson and Giddings to raise the defense of Qualified Immunity. Vincent v. City of Sulphur, 805 F.3d 543, 547 (5th Cir. 2015). … clearly established at the time of incident.