Case law

Coleman v. Alcolac, Inc.

888 F. Supp. 1388 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 6, 1995

It is well established that federal courts have a continuing duty to investigate whether jurisdiction is proper in a case, even if the parties themselves do not raise the issue. FDIC v. … One necessary preliminary matter the Court must address is whether China North qualifies as a foreign state in the sense of being an instrumentality of the People’s Republic of China. 28 U.S.C. § 1603 (a).

Jackson v. Texas a & M University System

975 F. Supp. 943 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jul 30, 1996

To the extent that they are alleged against the latter, these claims are barred by sovereign immunity. State universities have been held to be agencies of the state and to enjoy sovereign immunity. Bagg v. … Title VII Claims: No Continuing Violation. — Plaintiffs’ claims under Title VII do not qualify as “continuing violations.”

Borchgrevink v. Harris County, Texas

District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 30, 2025

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officers from civil liability in their individual capacities if their conduct does not violate clearly established federal statutory or constitutional law … To be “clearly established” for purposes of qualified immunity, “[t]he contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.”

Searles v. City of Houston

District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 8, 2025

Privette’s actions violated clearly established law to defeat summary judgment on qualified immunity. … But there can be a constitutional violation that does not meet the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity test. See Garcia v. Blevins, 957 F.3d at 599.

West v. City of Splendora

District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 6, 2024

When a defendant asserts a qualified immunity defense in a motion to dismiss, the district court must “carefully scrutinize the complaint . . . because qualified immunity means immunity from having to stand trial, not … that were violated were clearly established at the time of the offense.

Doe v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Galveston-Houston

408 F. Supp. 2d 272 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Dec 22, 2005

Under long-established procedure, the executive branch makes a determination to grant immunity to a head of state sued in the United States and then files a suggestion of immunity with the court. 1 “[0]nce the State Department … This argument fails for many of the same reasons that the Eleventh Amendment-based waiver argument fails: head-of-state immunity is fundamentally different from both the Eleventh Amendment and qualified immunity.

United States v. Lile (In Re Lile)

161 B.R. 788 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 11, 1993

Waiver of Sovereign Immunity The IRS cites authorities discussing whether 11 U.S.C. § 106 (e) waives sovereign immunity. … The Supreme Court did not establish a bright line test, instead stating that reasonableness and adequate guidance concerns should inform the constitutional analysis. Id.

Lyon

District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 7, 2026

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability “unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged … Thus, to overcome a defense of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that the official violated a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the official’s challenged conduct.

Harmouche v. Consulate Gen. of Qatar

313 F. Supp. 3d 815 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 12, 2018

Cir. 2007) (citations omitted) ("[L]ike many of our sister circuits, we have held that a foreign government's civil servants ... do not qualify for the commercial activity exception."). … The court concludes that Plaintiff has met his burden of establishing that his employment with Defendant falls under the FSIA's commercial activity exception. IV.

Benavides v. Harris County, Texas

District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 23, 2023

“The qualified immunity analysis has two components: (1) whether a plaintiff alleges or shows the violation of a federal constitutional or statutory right; and (2) whether the right in question was clearly established … Finally, the Court turns to the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis— i.e., whether Deputy Nunez’ actions violated clearly established law. As the Supreme Court held in Ashcroft v.

Hobart v. City of Stafford

916 F. Supp. 2d 783 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 9, 2013

judgment based on qualified immunity and those portions of its April 2012 order denying Chief Krahn’s motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … Instead, they dispute only whether Krahn is entitled to qualified immunity, an issue that is irrelevant in light of the Court’s holding.

Pair-A-Dice Acquisition Partners, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of the Galveston Wharves

185 F. Supp. 2d 703 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 5, 2002

The undisputed summary judgment evidence conclusively establishes that the Port never accepted Pair-A-Dice’s offer to conduct a gaming operation in Galveston. … Thus, Galveston qualifies as a municipality for purposes of § 54.001. See Times Atlas of the World: Comprehensive Edition Plate 112 (John C.

Rosas

District Court, S.D. Texas · Jul 2, 2026

Second, Rosas argues that qualified immunity may be defeated when an officer makes material falsehoods in support of a search and seizure. … He has not offered any clearly established law that makes it unconstitutional for a police officer to stop a driver under these circumstances to investigate.

Norris v. Housing Authority of City of Galveston

980 F. Supp. 885 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 3, 1997

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), government officials performing discretionary functions are immune from liability for damages so long as their conduct “does not violate clearly established … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 815-19 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2736-39 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), the Supreme Court adopted an objective standard for qualified immunity, and abolished the previous subjective good faith test.

Payne v. City of Houston, Texas

District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 19, 2024

as it relates to the TTCA claim; and (4) Plaintiffs fail to allege a clearly established constitutional violation to overcome -Cabrera’s qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from [civil] liability ‘unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

Clemens v. McNamee

638 F. Supp. 2d 742 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 30, 2009

Such a motion must “clearly establish either a manifest error of law or fact or must present newly discovered evidence. … Hoyt, the Texas Court of Appeals held that a math professor who had made allegedly defamatory statements regarding a university’s chief financial officer had qualified immunity from suit because the plaintiff was a public

Joubert v. City of Houston

District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 10, 2024

defense of qualified immunity.” … Setting these two pleading anomalies aside, Finner is clearly entitled to qualified immunity.

Hoskins v. Harris County Precinct 5

District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 29, 2025

“Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from [civil] liability ‘unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … In the current case, Weisner contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Clark v. Heard

538 F. Supp. 800 · District Court, S.D. Texas · May 3, 1982

Availability of Defense of Qualified Immunity The third question that the parties request this court to address is whether the defendants are immune from suit on the basis of a qualified immunity. … The only question concerning immunity of defendants from suit is thus whether defendants are immune from liability for the common law tort of false imprisonment *807 on the basis of a qualified good-faith immunity.

Murphy v. Butler

512 F. Supp. 2d 975 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 19, 2007

Butler replies that Ms actions are protected by qualified immunity. One Fifth Circuit case suggests that the qualified immunity test for First Amendment retaliation cases is coterminous with the Mt. Healthy inquiry. … Butler also claims qualified immunity with regard to the defamation claims of Senegal and Joubert. However, as will be discussed below, the qualified immunity issue for those claims is moot. ii.