Case law

Stevenson-Cotton v. Galveston County <font color="red">DO NOT DOCKET. CASE HAS BEEN REMANDED.</font>

District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 29, 2022

Killyon and White are state actors, they are not necessarily entitled to qualified immunity. Sanchez v. Oliver, 995 F.3d 461, 466 (5th Cir. 2021) (citing Perniciaro v. … Hayne, 860 F.3d 819, 823 (5th Cir. 2017) (“A defendant may act under color of state law for the purposes of § 1983 without receiving the related protections of qualified immunity.”)).

Comb v. BENJI'S SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL ACADEMY, INC.

745 F. Supp. 2d 755 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 15, 2010

Schneider's addition as a defendant is also proper because questions of law, such as qualified immunity, are common among all individual Defendants, including Mr. Schneider. … District of Columbia, 238 F.Supp.2d 114 (D.D.C.2002), clearly holds that "any fundamental change in, or elimination of, a basic element of the educational program qualifies as a change in placement."

Nicholas v. Brazos County, Texas

District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 26, 2020

The court will therefore analyze the constitutional claims under the plausibility standard from Twombly and Iqbal but will not consider a potential qualified immunity defense.2 Cf. Randle v. Lockwood, 666 F. … An officer is “entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’”

Richards v. Seariver Maritime Financial Holdings, Inc.

59 F. Supp. 2d 616 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 12, 1998

In order to establish a prima facie case of termination based on race and national origin under Title VII, Richards must show that: (1) he is a member of a protected group; (2) he applied for a position for which he was qualified … Since Richards has established a genuine issue of material fact with regard to this last element and has met his burden of establishing, he has established a prima facie case.

Lindly v. Montgomery County

District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 27, 2021

The defendants contend that the plaintiff fails to state a claim for deliberate indifference or excessive force and that, even if they did, qualified immunity bars their suit against the defendants. See Anderson v. … In light of the admissions by Richards and Dodson, including their experience, the Court infers that the qualified immunity bar is unavailable to them.

Zentgraf v. TEXAS a & M UNIVERSITY

509 F. Supp. 183 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 2, 1981

Geraghty, 445 U.S. 388 , 100 S.Ct. 1202 , 63 L.Ed.2d 479 (1980), has clearly emphasized “the flexible character of the Art. Ill mootness doctrine.” 445 U.S. at 400 , 100 S.Ct. at 1210 . … It is Defendants’ contention that the Corps of Cadets of Texas A & M University qualifies for this exemption.

McGee v. Arkel International, LLC

716 F. Supp. 2d 572 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 20, 2009

In order to establish federal officer removal jurisdiction, the defendants must establish (1) that they are “persons” within the meaning of the statute; (2) that the defendants acted pursuant to a federal officer’s directions … Ambassador to Iraq on November 17, 2008, adjusts this immunity, although the retroactive effects of the SOFA and laws to be passed pursuant to it remain unclear. 7 .

Smith v. Eastern Airlines, Inc.

651 F. Supp. 214 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Dec 23, 1986

Mary Smith’s testimony established that she was otherwise qualified for the position of flight attendant. … To accomplish this, defendant must clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, the reasons for the plaintiff’s rejection.

Zarate v. Coger

District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 24, 2025

Standard of Review The defendants seek dismissal on grounds of Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity, and for failure to state a claim on which relief can … When the jurisdictional issue is of a factual nature rather than facial, plaintiff must establish subject matter jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. Irwin v.

LULAC COUNCILS 4433 & 4436 v. City of Galveston

979 F. Supp. 514 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 7, 1997

An unwanted transfer may also qualify as an adverse employment action. See Rutan v. … Clearly under Title VII, Plaintiffs have established at the very least a fact issue as to whether they have suffered adverse employment action.

Exxon Mobil Corp. v. United States

108 F. Supp. 3d 486 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 4, 2015

“In 1942, President Roosevelt established several agencies to oversee war-time production of avgas. … Similarly, the Baton Rouge refinery and two of the Baton Rouge Plancors easily qualify as one facility.

United States v. Richards

940 F. Supp. 2d 548 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 17, 2013

There exist however certain "well-defined and narrowly limited" areas of expression in which the government may impose content-based restrictions immune from strict scrutiny review because the "freedom of speech" guaranteed … The Court then established the test that continues to control obscenity cases: To qualify as a regulation of obscene speech, a prohibition must be limited to works that (1) “taken as a whole, appeal to the prurient interest

Caldwell v. KHOU-TV & Gannett Co.

190 F. Supp. 3d 667 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jun 3, 2016

A plaintiff can raise a fact issue on the question of pretext in a RIF case by adducing evidence that “he was clearly better qualified than ... employees who were retained.” Walther v. … Plaintiff has not presented any evidence from which a reasonable fact-finder could conclude that he was clearly better qualified than the video editors who were retained.

Rios v. REYNOLDS METALS COMPANY

332 F. Supp. 1209 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jul 6, 1971

But, it is inconceivable to this Court that anyone could require his employer to promote him to a job he is not qualified to fill because of past discrimination against him or other *1211 members of his particular group. … The issue of discretionary deference to arbitration decisions in certain cases was not clearly resolved by the Fifth Circuit.

Holbert v. Thompson Industrial Service LLC

District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 27, 2024

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII, the plaintiff must show: (1) he belongs to a protected class; (2) he was qualified for his position; (3) he suffered an adverse employment action; and ( … While Plaintiff has alleged nothing about his qualifications, reading Plaintiff’s complaint liberally, the undersigned construes Plaintiff’s pleading to be that he was qualified for his position.

Gantt

District Court, S.D. Texas · Apr 23, 2026

Whether a federal court has jurisdiction must “be established as a threshold matter” and “is inflexible and 2 without exception.” Webb v. … “The Eleventh Amendment bars an individual from suing a state in federal court unless the state consents to suit or Congress has clearly and validly abrogated the state’s sovereign immunity.” Perez v.

Britt v. Nueces County

District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 30, 2024

Because the claim may be dismissed on its merits, the motion to dismiss does not specifically address this issue. 2 Defendants also assert the defense of qualified immunity on … The Court DENIES IN PART AS MOOT Defendants’ motion to dismiss (D.E. 4) insofar as it advances the qualified immunity defense. Britt’s request for leave to amend (D.E. 12) is DENIED.

Willie v. Harris County, Texas

202 F. Supp. 549 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 31, 1962

This was deemed essential to clearly delineate the alleged deprivation of plaintiffs’ rights. … As it was there explained: “Defendants’ position regarding segregation or integration of the park is not established by any official action or affirmative policy.

Houston Contractors Ass'n v. METRO. TRANSIT AUTH. OF HARRIS CTY.

993 F. Supp. 545 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 13, 1997

Even if that theory were constitutionally acceptable, Metro does not qualify. independent communal racism. … Neither the federal nor state statute clearly requires the program as Metro apparently administers it.

Hooks

District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 9, 2026

Here, Plaintiff fails to establish any waiver of immunity, consequently, this Court is barred by the Eleventh Amendment from considering these claims. … Here, Plaintiff fails to establish any waiver of immunity, and as a result, all of his claims against the OAG are barred by sovereign immunity.