Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,190 results
1.16s
District Court, S.D. Texas · May 22, 2023
March 23, 2021) (noting that crimes involving fraud qualify for admission under Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a)(2)); United States v. … Holmes impeached Malbrough’s testimony by establishing her penchant for deceit, dishonesty, and fraud in pursuit of money.
Cited 0 timesUnknownRecif Resources, LLC v. Juniper Capital Advisors, LP
District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 17, 2020
Paragraph 16 states clearly and unambiguously that notwithstanding any other provision of the Confidentiality Agreement, which would include the statement regarding current operations in the vicinity of Recif’s AOI, Recif … Throughout this litigation, Recif has maintained the position that all of its proprietary information qualifies as trade secrets.
Cited 0 timesUnknownAvalon Holdings, Inc. v. BP p.l.c.
109 F. Supp. 3d 946 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 30, 2014
The Court does not base its decision on this argument, and ■ notes that a leading treatise on English law specifically provides that: [A] representor ‘may qualify what might otherwise have been an outright statement of fact … "It is clearly established that a representation of present intention, whether the intention be that of the representor or of a third party, is a sufficient representation of an existing fact to form the foundation of an
Cited 1 timesPublishedEqual Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bass Pro Outdoor World, LLC
1 F. Supp. 3d 647 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 4, 2014
The Determination added that “evidence obtained during the investigation establishes reasonable cause to believe that there is a violation of Title VII, in that the Respondent ... deterred and chilled African American and … Mach Min., LLC, 738 F.3d 171 (7th Cir.2013), while clearly somewhat at odds with binding Fifth Circuit precedent, nevertheless offers some valuable insight. 15 First, Judge Hamilton made clear that, if dismissal for failure
Cited 5 timesPublishedEdwards v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 19, 2025
However, the ALJ accounts for the apparent discrepancy by qualifying her language: “[Plaintiff] has the residual functional capacity to perform medium exertion work except…[Plaintiff] can occasionally…stoop … In addition to sustained eye contact rapport was also noted to be easily established.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 8, 2019
Such a statement is clearly a promise 60 Dkt. No. 1 p. 9, ¶ 43. 61 Fed. Land Bank Ass’n v. Sloane, 825 S.W.2d 439, 442 (Tex. 1991). 62 Allied Vista, Inc. v. … Sex Discrimination A plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of sex discrimination by showing that he: (1) belongs to a protected class; (2) was qualified for the position;
Cited 0 timesUnknownMcWhorter v. Service Corporation International
District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 11, 2024
This means that the plaintiff must clearly allege facts at the pleading stage that demonstrate each criterion. … But on the other, it simply “must appear that the representative[s] will vigorously prosecute the interests of the class through qualified counsel.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 30, 2022
Hearsay evidence and unsworn documents that cannot be presented in a form that would be admissible in evidence at trial do not qualify as competent opposing evidence. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(2); Martin v. John W. … To hold otherwise would expose premises owners to “strict liability for any dangerous condition on their premises”—a result the Supreme Court of Texas has “clearly rejected.” Id.
Cited 0 timesUnknownFugedi v. United Rentals (North America) Inc.
District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 17, 2024
By his own admission, he had no experience that made him particularly qualified to serve as the Trustee. See id. at 19. This factor clearly suggests manufactured jurisdiction. See Renner v. Vitcov, 339 F. … Again, all that matters is motive, and it is Fugedi’s burden to prove facts establishing jurisdiction. See Williamson, 645 F.2d at 413. He has not carried that burden.
Cited 0 timesUnknown452 F. Supp. 944 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Dec 16, 1977
Clearly, this case is one involving such circumstances. … Thus, these orders establish inter alia certain ethical standards of conduct which henceforth will be applicable to this plaintiff.
Cited 31 timesPublishedInsituform Technologies, Inc. v. Cat Contracting, Inc.
518 F. Supp. 2d 876 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 26, 2007
The contention that the October 1994 switch date should be established from pleadings filed in this case is drastically weakened by an examination of the docket sheet. … Penn Nutrients, Inc., 962 F.2d 1048, 1050 (Fed.Cir.1992) (holding that “the exceptional nature of the case must be established by clear and convincing evidence”); Hughes v.
Cited 6 timesPublishedPeople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. Shane Hinckley
District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 16, 2021
. § 1983 because (1) TAMU’s advertisement policy is unconstitutional facially and as applied to PETA; (2) the policy is vague in that it is not clearly defined such that a person of ordinary intelligence can readily determine … The term “political” “can be expansive”—a button urging people to vote would qualify. Id.
Cited 0 timesUnknownJung v. Accredited Management Solutions, LLC
District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 6, 2020
Moreover, the court should consider “whether material issues of fact are at issue, whether the grounds for default are clearly established, whether the default was caused by a good faith mistake or excusable … As such, the message itself qualifies as an indirect conveying of information about a debt”); also see Foti v. NCO Financial Systems, Inc., 424 F.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 21, 2026
Nevertheless, credibility determinations are the domain of the trial court and “must not be set aside unless clearly erroneous.” FED. R. CIV. P. 52(a)(6). 6. … Because that status, once granted, cannot lightly be taken away, the Government has a strong and legitimate interest in ensuring that only qualified persons are granted citizenship.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 15, 2023
(Dkt. 71 at 1.) 2 Plaintiff’s filings do not clearly state whether he seeks $400,000 for each of these three claims, or if the $400,000 represents the total amount sought. … Section 18.001 thus prevents this Court from exercising its required gatekeeping function under Rule 702, creating “an exception to Rule 702’s requirement that a person must be qualified as an expert before testifying in
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 14, 2025
Due to its “extraordinary” nature, courts cannot grant preliminary injunctive unless “the movant has clearly carried the burden” of persuasion on all four factors. See Guy Carpenter & Co. v. … Instead, Plaintiffs reach for a nuclear alternative, asking this Court to “establish[ ] Identical Receivership as was in State Court prior to” removal. See Dkt. 20 at 18.
Cited 0 timesUnknownPeel v. cPaperless LLC dba SafeSend
District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 8, 2024
“[I]t is clearly proper in deciding a 12(b)(6) motion to take judicial notice of matters of public record.” Hamilton v. Promise Healthcare, No. 23-30190, 2023 WL 6635076, at *3 (5th Cir. … necessary to establish a pattern of racketeering activity.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 31, 2022
Monsanto has clearly demonstrated that the Roundup products and the active ingredient, glyphosate, have been “subject to licensing or approval by the federal government or a federal agency.” … (3) Who is a qualified expert as described in § 159.153(b).
Cited 0 timesUnknown268 F. Supp. 2d 718 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 23, 2003
For instance, on May 12, 1998, USL represented that it “replaces the acquired business’ computer systems with its own management reporting and control system” and attempts to “retain the acquired business’ qualified managers … Insisting that USL did disclose clearly and expressly the risks associated with its liquid waste disposal business, in their motion to dismiss Defendants refer to their March 12, 1999 Prospectus, which stated at p. 10 under
Cited 12 timesPublishedSueros y Bebidas Rehidratantes, S.A. de D.V. v. Indus Enterprises, LLC
District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 5, 2023
The product packaging and labeling make them appear to be virtually identical, but the contents are clearly materially different, and, on closer inspection, the labeling information is materially different. … f) The Defendant’s Intent “Proof of the defendant’s intent to benefit from the good reputation of the plaintiff's products is not required in order to establish infringement.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna