Case law

T.L. Individually and A/N/F of J.T., a Minor v. New Caney Independent School District, Texas Education Agency, and Mike Morath, in his Individual and Official Capacity

District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 26, 2026

It is Plaintiff’s position that “[t]his was very clearly an improper predetermination.” (Id. at 15). … The SEHO’s decision states “[t]he evidence . . . clearly established that the Student’s mother was given several opportunities through the evaluation review meeting to ask questions, request clarification, and provide input

United States v. Armco Steel Corporation

333 F. Supp. 1073 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 17, 1971

Standard Oil Co., 384 U.S. 224 , 86 S.Ct. 1427 , 16 L.Ed.2d 492 , clearly negative the foregoing contention of Armco. … In the opinion of this Court he is eminently qualified as an expert in his field. Mr.

Smith v. Harris County Sheriff's Officer Reyes

District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 26, 2024

the case and dismiss the complaint at any time if it determines that the complaint is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … It lacks an arguable basis in fact “if, after providing the plaintiff the opportunity to present additional facts when necessary, the facts alleged are clearly baseless.” Id.

Wilfred Academy of Hair & Beauty Culture v. Southern Ass'n of Colleges & Schools

738 F. Supp. 200 · District Court, S.D. Texas · May 4, 1990

COEI’s purpose is to identify occupational education institutions which qualify for accreditation by meeting the standards, policies, and procedures of COEI. … The uncontroverted evidence establishes that the Schools obtain little, if any, financial advantage, from applying the NACCAS rather than the SACS refund policy.

Westchester Media Co. v. PRL USA Holdings, Inc.

103 F. Supp. 2d 935 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 4, 1999

Westchester insists that PRL most often uses the word in connection with another qualifier, such as, “Lauren” or with “Ralph Lauren”, or with “USA”, “Jean”, “Sport”, or the like, and so these qualified uses necessarily refute … Further, a mark qualifies for protection under the Act only if it is famous.

In Re Enron Corp. Securities

529 F. Supp. 2d 644 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 5, 2006

Clearly, as a threshold step, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation made such a predicate determination in establishing MDL 1446 and assigning it to this Court. … A major difficulty in the wake of Central Bank is defining clearly what conduct constitutes aiding and abetting and what would qualify as a primary violation of § 10(b).

Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. v. NL Industries

553 F. Supp. 2d 733 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 31, 2008

The panel clearly recognized and correctly stated Delaware contract law in its Contract Award. … The result alone does not provide a ground to find manifest disregard of clearly applicable law. See Univ.

R. Ready Productions, Inc. v. Cantrell

85 F. Supp. 2d 672 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 7, 2000

Plaintiffs’ works contain clearly unprotectable elements and phrases. … The language of the May 1995 contract, the parties’ later agreement, clearly, intends to supersede the March 6th agreement altogether.

In re Heartland Payment Systems, Inc.

834 F. Supp. 2d 566 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Dec 1, 2011

Intended beneficiaries qualify as third-party beneficiaries, but incidental beneficiaries do not. See id. … Vans Skate Park, 187 N.J. 323 , 901 A.2d 381, 389 (2006) (concluding that a New Jersey statute conferring immunity from suit upon certain volunteers but not businesses weighed against recognizing a minor’s waiver of liability

Union Pacific R. Co. v. Harris County, Tex.

790 F. Supp. 2d 568 · District Court, S.D. Texas · May 17, 2011

Accordingly, Union Pacific must go beyond these authorities to establish federal-question jurisdiction. … Observing that the rule originated in Ex parte Young, the Fifth Circuit recently concluded that Shaw “clearly establishes a federal right of action against ‘state officials’ to enjoin the enforcement of preempted state regulations

Jordan v. Brewster

District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 26, 2024

He further alleges that, at various times between 2018 and 2022, he and Brewster entered into agreements to resolve their dispute and establish that Brewster violated Jordan’s rights (id. at 2-3). … Given this ruling, the Court does not reach the defendants’ arguments for dismissal based on sovereign immunity, the FTCA, and the Tucker Act.

Maldonado v. FirstService Residential, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 18, 2021

App’x 416, 420 (5th Cir. 2009) (“[C]omments that are vague . . . are insufficient to establish discrimination.”); Anderson v. Wachovia Mortg. … This qualifies as a commercial modification under § 10.20. Royal Brook has adequately alleged that the Maldonados’ trailer does not qualify as a light truck. b.

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Johnson

408 F. Supp. 2d 259 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 4, 2005

CFTC contends that the CEA clearly prohibits the actions described in the complaint. … Further, they argue that the CEA provides that “nothing in this Act shall apply” to qualifying transactions in “ex-, empt commodities.” See § 2(h)(1).

Bulbs 4 East Side, Inc. v. Ricks

199 F. Supp. 3d 1151 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 10, 2016

As described above, the fair use defense clearly does not apply to Defendant’s use of the Domain Name. … It therefore cannot qualify for the protection of 15 U.S.C. § 1115 (b)(4). TCPIP Holding Co. v. Haar Commc’ns, Inc., 244 F.3d 88, 104 (2d Cir.2001). .

Struthers Scientific & International Corp. v. General Foods Corp.

45 F.R.D. 375 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 1, 1968

pertain to steps 10-14, inclusive, as these appear in the diagram accompanying the Letters Patent. 2 Turning now to the implementation of thus ruling — Interrogatories 18(c), 29 and 38 should be answered in full since they clearly … The defendant, however, will be permitted to qualify or restrict its answer as may be necessary because of any uncertainty. Liquidometer Corp. v. Capital Airlines, Inc., 24 F.R.D. 319, 325 (D.Del.1959). D.

Seguros Comercial Americas S.A. De C v. v. American President Lines, Ltd.

910 F. Supp. 1235 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 4, 1995

The tracking papers clearly denote a carriage by through bill of lading. 4 Plaintiff attempts to show by the *1240 deposition testimony of APL’s Laredo employee, John M. … APL relies upon the affidavit of Roberto Rendon, a highly qualified Mexican attorney, to show the adequacy of the Mexican courts. Sr.

Trusty v. Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC

District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 15, 2020

By her own admission, Trusty fails to establish the direct liability required for assault or battery in Texas. … She does not allege any facts showing that Walmart employees clearly directed the officers to arrest her in such a way that rises to the level required by Rodriguez.

Mims v. Deepwater Corrosion Services, Inc.

90 F. Supp. 3d 679 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 16, 2015

The unresolved conflicts among courts in this Circuit clearly raise such doubt as to whether removal in this action was proper. … Whether an injured worker qualifies as a "seaman” under the Jones Act is a mixed question of law and fact, usually determined by a jury. Naquin v. Elevating Boats, LLC, 744 F.3d 927, 931 (5th Cir.2014).

Ornelas v. Southern Tire Mart, LLC

292 F.R.D. 388 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 28, 2013

There are situations where the pleadings alone are sufficient to establish the “in controversy” requirement. Schlagenhauf, 379 U.S. at 119 , 85 S.Ct. 234 . … The parties are free to agree otherwise, as Defendant has clearly indicated it would consider scheduling such an examination at “another mutually agreeable time and place.”

Arteaga-Rios v. United States of America Do not docket in this case. File only in 2:17cr435.

District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 6, 2020

Because he qualified for safety valve, he was not subject to the statutory mandatory minimum sentence of 60 months. … The Court concludes that Movant cannot establish at least one of the Slack criteria.