​US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
United States v. Zamora-Salazar

Docket: 16-20307
Opinion Date: June 28, 2017
Judge: Carl E. Stewart
Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's convictions and sentences for conspiracy to import and importation of methamphetamine. The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support defendant's convictions, and the district court did not clearly err by imposing a two-level sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice.

Brewer v. Hayne

Dockets: 16-60116 , 16-60342
Opinion Date: June 27, 2017
Judge: Higginbotham
Areas of Law: Criminal Law

Plaintiffs Brewer and Brooks filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983, alleging that defendants, forensic consultants, violated their constitutional rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments when, as retained government experts, they provided investigators with—and later testified to—baseless findings, and that they knew that the evidence was baseless or at least acted with reckless disregard of that reality. The Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for defendants and held that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because they were engaged in the criminal investigative functions of the state protected at common law, and plaintiffs failed to raise a genuine issue of fact as to whether defendants violated their right to due process by intentionally creating false or misleading scientific evidence.

​US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Trevino v. Davis

Docket: 15-70019
Opinion Date: June 27, 2017
Judge: Jerry E. Smith
Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of habeas relief on petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel (IATC). The court held that, assuming counsel's performance was deficient, petitioner failed to show that he was prejudiced by the mitigation investigation of his trial counsel and therefore his IATC claim failed.

​US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
United States v. Colorado Cessa

Docket: 16-50328
Opinion Date: June 26, 2017
Judge: Stephen Andrew Higginson
Areas of Law: Criminal Law

Defendant appealed his conviction for conspiracy to commit money laundering. The Fifth Circuit remanded for further findings on the Brady and Giglio claim, holding that the district court clearly erred in concluding that the FBI Forms 302 (official interview memoranda) were not favorable. The court did not reach defendant's challenge to the forfeiture order, and otherwise rejected defendant's arguments.

​Credeur v. Louisiana

Docket: 16-30658
Opinion Date: June 23, 2017
Judge: James Earl Graves, Jr.
Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Labor & Employment Law

Plaintiff filed suit against her employer, the Office of Attorney General for the State of Louisiana (DOJ), alleging failure to accommodate, harassment, and retaliation in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law (LEDL). The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in the DOJ's favor, holding that there was no genuine issue of material fact as to whether plaintiff has established a prima facie case on any of her disability-based claims. In regard to the failure to accommodate claim, plaintiff failed to demonstrate that she was a qualified individual, i.e., that she can perform the essential functions of her job unaided or with the assistance of a reasonable accommodation; in regard to the disability-based harassment claim, the difficulties plaintiff managed while attempting to manage her serious illness and employment were not sufficient to create a hostile work environment; and the record did not support that any of the DOJ's actions were taken in retaliation for plaintiff's protected activity.

​US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Barber v. Bryant

Dockets: 16-60477 , 16-60478
Opinion Date: June 22, 2017
Judge: Jerry E. Smith
Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law

Plaintiffs filed suit challenging the constitutionality of a Mississippi statute, HB 1523, asserting that the state government disapproves of and is hostile to same-sex couples, to unmarried people who engage in sexual relations, and to transgender people. HB 1523 provides that the state government shall not take any discriminatory action against persons who act in accordance with certain beliefs in an enumerated set of circumstances. The district court issued a preliminary injunction against the implementation of HB 1523. The Fifth Circuit reversed the preliminary injunction and rendered a judgment of dismissal for want of jurisdiction, holding that plaintiffs did not have standing. In regard to Establishment Clause injury, the court held that the religious display cases did not provide a basis for standing to challenge the endorsement of beliefs that exist only in the text of a statute. Furthermore, neither the religious exercise cases generally, nor Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000), provide support for plaintiffs' standing. In the alternative, plaintiffs have failed to show an injury in fact. The court also held that plaintiffs did not have taxpayer standing to challenge HB 1523 and the Barber plaintiffs did not have standing under the Equal Protection Clause.

​US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Merritt Hawkins & Assocs. v. Gresham

Docket: 16-10439
Opinion Date: June 21, 2017
Judge: Carl E. Stewart
Areas of Law: Contracts, Labor & Employment Law

MHA filed suit against defendants, two former employees, based on the alleged breach of non-compete and non-solicitation provisions in its employment contracts, tortious interference, and theft of computer files. The Fifth Circuit vacated the award of exemplary damages to MHA because there was insufficient evidence to support the award; affirmed the district court's evidentiary rulings; affirmed the district court's denial of a motion for judgment as a matter of law where the jury's verdict was consistent; affirmed the district court's take-nothing judgment in favor of Defendant Bowden; affirmed the award of attorneys' fees; and affirmed the district court's denial of equitable remedies.

​US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Young v. Davis

Docket: 15-70023
Opinion Date: June 20, 2017
Judge: Higginbotham
Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Petitioner was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. The Fifth Circuit granted a certificate of appealability on two issues: (1) a Mills claim that the omission of a jury instruction—required under Texas law—that jurors need not agree on what particular evidence they found mitigating created a substantial risk that the jurors may have mistakenly believed mitigating evidence needed to be accepted unanimously and (2) that petitioner's trial counsel's failure to object to the missing instruction constituted ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington. In regard to the Mills claim, the court held that, given the record, there did not exist a reasonable likelihood or substantial probability that reasonable jurors may have thought they were precluded from considering any mitigating evidence unless all 12 jurors agreed on the existence of a particular such circumstances. Therefore, the state courts did not unreasonably apply Mills. Assuming arguendo that failing to object to the absent jury instruction was deficient performance, defendant failed to show prejudice. Accordingly, the Texas state courts' application of Strickland to defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claims was not unreasonable. The court affirmed the denial of habeas relief.

Sammons v. United States

Docket: 17-50201
Opinion Date: June 19, 2017
Judge: Jerry E. Smith
Areas of Law: Civil Procedure, Real Estate & Property Law

Plaintiff filed suit pro se asserting a takings claim against the United States. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's conclusion that, under the Tucker Act, plaintiff must pursue his claim in the Court of Federal Claims (CFC). The Tucker Act vests exclusive jurisdiction for takings claims over $10,000 in the CFC and plaintiff asserted that he was entitled to $900,000 in just compensation. Therefore, the district court properly dismissed the claim based on lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

​US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Edionwe v. Bailey

Docket: 16-41310
Opinion Date: June 19, 2017
Judge: Edith Brown Clement
Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Education Law, Labor & Employment Law

Plaintiff filed a wrongful termination suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1988, alleging violations of procedural and substantive due process stemming from legislation that abolished the University of Texas-Pan American (UTPA) and the University of Texas at Brownsville (UTB). The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings with respect to plaintiff's section 1983 claims because plaintiff failed to demonstrate that he had a constitutionally protected interest in employment or tenure at UTRGV or the UT System at large. The court explained that plaintiff's protected property interests were limited to an interest in continuing appointment at the institution that granted him tenure, UTPA, an interest which terminated when the university was abolished. Furthermore, the court denied by implication plaintiff's motion for leave to amend pleadings, and denied plaintiff's motion to alter or amend the judgment. The court also declined to exercise jurisdiction over and dismissed plaintiff's declaratory judgment claim.

​Louisiana Becomes First State to Ban the Box

www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2017/06/19/louisiana-becomes-first-state-ban-box

Balle v. Nueces County

Docket: 16-40789
Opinion Date: June 15, 2017
Judge: Edward C. Prado
Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law

Plaintiff filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983, alleging claims arising out of injuries he sustained while he was detained at a facility operated by Nueces County and was under the care of the facility's medical professionals, Deborah Charette and Chelsea Johnson. The Fifth Circuit held that the district court did not err in concluding that plaintiff's claims against Charette and Johnson were barred by the statute of limitations. However, the district court erred in dismissing plaintiff's claims against the County because the amended complaint pleaded facts sufficient to support a municipal liability claim that was plausible on its face.

​US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Sorto v. Davis

Docket: 16-70005
Opinion Date: June 15, 2017
Judge: Edward C. Prado
Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Fifth Circuit had previously issued a nondispositive opinion denying certificates of appealability (COAs) with respect to petitioner's Miranda and ineffective assistance of counsel claims. After reviewing supplemental briefs submitted by both parties, the court held that Texas's corrective process did not effectively protect petitioner's rights under Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002). In this case, new evidence -- a full-scale IQ score of 63 -- rendered his Atkins claims unexhausted. Accordingly, the court held that the district court based its denial of funding to obtain testing on an erroneous view of the law and abused its discretion. The court vacated and remanded for further proceedings.

​US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Lee v. Offshore Logistical & Transport

Docket: 16-31049
Opinion Date: June 12, 2017
Judge: Catharina Haynes
Areas of Law: Civil Procedure, Admiralty & Maritime Law, Personal Injury

Plaintiff filed suit against Offshore under the Jones Act, alleging maritime claims for negligence and unseaworthiness arising out of an alleged injury he suffered. The Fifth Circuit vacated the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor Offshore and remanded for reconsideration in light of the current Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, including whether the particular material to which objection was lodged can or cannot be presented in a form that would be admissible at trial. In this case, the district court relied on a prior version of Rule 56 and cases thereunder to discount the signed but unsworn report of Captain James P. Jamison.

​Louisiana Rated 48th Among States in Kids Count Rankings


www.usnews.com/news/best-states/louisiana/articles/2017-06-13/louisiana-rated-48th-among-states-in-kids-count-rankings

In re: Settoon Towing, LLC

Docket: 16-30459
Opinion Date: June 12, 2017
Judge: Leslie H. Southwick
Areas of Law: Energy, Oil & Gas Law, Admiralty & Maritime Law

The Oil Pollution Act (OPA), as confirmed by the Act's legislative history, grants to an OPA Responsible Party the right to receive contribution from other entities who were partially at fault for a discharge of oil. Specifically, a Responsible Party may recover from a jointly liable third party any damages it paid to claimants, including those arising out of purely economic losses. In a suit arising from a collision of two barges, the district court found both Settoon and Marquette Transportation were negligent. The Fifth Circuit held that Settoon could receive contribution from Marquette for its payment of purely economic damages, i.e., for the cleanup costs. The court also held that the district court's apportionment of fault was not clearly erroneous. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.

​What happened to Louisiana fiscal reform?

​www.dailycomet.com/news/20170611/what-happened-to-louisiana-fiscal-reform

Orleans Parish is nation's most-murderous county, law enforcement website reports

www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2017/06/orleans_parish_is_nations_most.html