Case law

Jones v. Bush

122 F. Supp. 2d 713 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 1, 2000

United Gas Pipe Line Co., 760 F.2d 618, 621 (5th Cir.1985) (stating that movant must “clearly carr[y] the burden of persuasion.”). … The court should look to all evidence shedding light on the litigant’s intention to establish domicile.

DSC Communications Corp. v. DGI Technologies, Inc.

898 F. Supp. 1183 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 1, 1995

The record establishes that the only way to understand the functional elements of DSC’s firmware was to disassemble the object code on the chip. … That is clearly not the result intended by the Copyright Act or the preliminary injunction standard.

Texas Western Financial Corp. v. McCraw Candies, Inc.

347 F. Supp. 445 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 13, 1972

Secondly, the evidence clearly shows the machine was accepted by McCraw. Evidence of acceptance can be gleaned from the two letters transmitted by McCraw to Texas Western. … Any such contract or lease not assumed or rejected within such time, whether or not a trustee has been appointed or has qualified, shall be deemed to be rejected.

Hinton

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 26, 2026

Dec. 31, 2025) (finding the plaintiff pleaded no facts establishing a plausible discriminatory intent). … Indeed, he clearly states that the alleged discrimination is driven only by where he is housed within the jail.

Biron v. Upton

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 7, 2020

immunity. … Because the Court has determined that plaintiff Biron lacks a cause of action under Bivens, the Court need not address the qualified immunity issue. See generally Maria S. As Next Friend for E.H.F. v.

Rosales v. Cockrell

220 F. Supp. 2d 593 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 25, 2001

Hence, the Court finds that the state court’s adjudication was neither contrary to nor an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law. E. … Accordingly, the Court finds that the state court’s decision was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law. F.

Elbanna

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 13, 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. … So the complaint qualifies as clearly baseless, irrational, or wholly incredible, requiring dismissal with prejudice.

Day

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 6, 2026

Here, Day does not make a showing that Dallas College clearly intended to be bound to the internal policies referenced in Day’s employment contract. … Day Established a Prima Facie Case of Retaliation To establish a prima facie claim of retaliation, a plaintiff must establish that (1) she engaged in an activity protected by Title VII; (2) she was subjected

Sandoval v. Apfel

86 F. Supp. 2d 601 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 29, 2000

services furnished, except that ... attorney fees shall not be awarded in excess of $125 per hour unless the court determines that an increase in the cost of living or a special factor, such as the limited availability of qualified … A judgment for costs when taxed against the United States shall, in an amount established by statute, court rule, or order, be limited to reimbursing in whole or in part the prevailing party for the costs incurred by such

United States v. Floyd

814 F. Supp. 1355 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Feb 23, 1993

The final three elements of the test for issuance of an injunction clearly weigh in the Government’s favor. The first element, however, is more problematic and requires further discussion. … Those third parties received the benefit of the payments, at least in the short *1363 term, and thus qualify as third-party transferees under the statute.

Vasquez v. LaFaurie

District Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 26, 2024

are clearly established; and (6) “whether the court would think itself obliged to set aside the default on the defendant’s motion.” Lindsey v. Prive Corp., 161 F.3d 886, 893 (5th Cir. 1998). … Fifth, the grounds for default judgment are clearly established.8 Sixth and finally, finding that Defendant has made no attempt to participate in this lawsuit in the five months since it was commenced, and because the

Doyle v. Combined Systems Inc

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 11, 2023

The basic elements establishing the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction are not in doubt. … The Court concludes that the PLCAA establishes a non-jurisdictional defense. V.

Williams v. City of Childress

District Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 3, 2021

“[T]he operation of a major bodily function” such as “functions of the immune system. .. and... brain respiratory, circulatory, cardiovascular . . . functions” are also major life activities. 29 C.F.R. … Alcoa, Inc., 339 F.3d 359, 366 (Sth Cir. 2003). 12 (3) Plaintiff's doctor’s certification was clearly falsified, and (4) there were no FMLA violations. ECF No. 7 at 33-34.

Stancu v. Hyatt Corporation/Hyatt Regency Dallas

District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 30, 2021

See, e.g., Reddish, 2011 WL 573413, at *2 (“Typical examples of claims which can be dismissed pursuant to § 1915(e), or its predecessor, § 1915(d), include: (1) claims against which it is clear that the defendants are immune … from suit, (2) claims of infringement of a legal interest that clearly does not exist, and (3) claims which are barred by limitations.”

Hollins v. Miller

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

That caution notwithstanding, a “claim against a defendant who is immune from suit is frivolous because it is based upon an indisputably meritless legal theory. … deliberate indifference requires the prisoner to submit evidence that prison officials “‘refused to treat him, ignored his complaints, intentionally treated him incorrectly, or engaged in any similar conduct that would clearly

Soria v. Briningstool

District Court, N.D. Texas · May 20, 2024

Section 1404(a) authorizes parties to a contract to enforce forum-selection clauses via a motion to transfer.5 Forum-selection clauses are presumptively valid and enforceable unless the opposing party can “clearly … immunity, (ii) agrees that it shall not attempt to deny or defeat such personal jurisdiction by motion or other request for leave from any such court or that such action is brought in an inconvenient forum and (iii

R.A.J. v. Miller

590 F. Supp. 1310 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 2, 1984

In a review of 217 patient records the Panel noted a failure by staff to clearly state problems as required by the use of the PORS. … The deadlines established in the Agreement for implementation of Section VI(D) have not been met, but the parties have continued their efforts to establish modified time tables.

Siddiqui v. AutoZone West, Inc.

731 F. Supp. 2d 639 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 16, 2010

. ¶ 1, the harassment and discrimination claim is clearly limited to race, see id. at ¶ 31. 5 Siddiqui alleges that he was not considered for promotions due to his race, ethnicity, national origin, and religion. … (holding that court would consider plaintiffs discrimination claim only under pretext alternative because plaintiff contended that defendant’s stated justification for discharge was untrue and did not clearly contend that

Compton Corp. Ex Rel. Kellogg v. United States Department of Energy (In Re Compton Corp.)

90 B.R. 798 · District Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 9, 1988

DISCUSSION At the outset, the Court notes that it is bound to accept the factual findings of the Bankruptcy Court unless such findings are “clearly erroneous.” … The effect of an exception is not to make the action immune from injunction. The [bankruptcy] court has ample other powers to stay actions not covered by the automatic stay.

Ryan LLC v. Federal Trade Commission

District Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 3, 2024

Simply put, the FTC argues that Plaintiffs fail to establish the necessity of a preliminary injunction to prevent imminent, irreparable harm as neither “mere litigation expense” or “self-inflicted injury” qualify as irreparable … United States, 7 F.3d 1259, 1262 (6th Cir. 1993) (sovereign immunity extends to “agencies of the United States as well, which are immune absent a showing of a waiver of sovereign immunity.”).