May 1, 2023, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • Noble House, L.L.C. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, 22-20281, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • Engelhardt, J. (Higginbotham, Smith, Engelhardt), venue, insurance, forum selection clause
    • Affirming dismissal without prejudice of plaintiff’s coverage suit for forum non conveniens, on basis that parties’ insurance policy contained an enforceable forum-selection clause requiring litigation in the courts of England and Wales with no return-jurisdiction clause required.
    • Holding that it should apply a “strong presumption” favoring enforcement of mandatory forum-selection clauses, the Court held, “the presence of a mandatory, enforceable forum-selection clause simplifies the usual [forum non conveniens] analysis in two ways. First, the plaintiff’s choice of forum merits no weight because, by contracting for a specific forum, the plaintiff has effectively exercised its venue privilege before a dispute arises. Second, the private-interest factors weigh entirely in favor of the preselected forum; so, the district court may consider arguments about public-interest factors only. Hence, a valid forum-selection clause controls the forum non conveniens inquiry in all but the most unusual cases.” (Internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
    • The Court then held that the foreign forum-selection clause was not unreasonable under the circumstances. As to whether the England/Wales forum might subject the plaintiff to a time-bar that would not apply in Texas courts, the Court held, “Unfortunately for Noble House, controlling caselaw affords it no sympathy.” The Court held that choosing a forum in contravention of the forum-selection clause for limitations purposes would be “gamesmanship”; and that the plaintiff “occasioned its own predicament by failing to timely file its claim in the contractually-specified forum.”
    • The Court then held that there was no requirement for a return-jurisdiction clause, or an order that the defendant not count the pendency of the action in the dismissing court against the limitations period in the selected-forum court. “The existence of a mandatory, enforceable forum-selection clause swallows the purpose of a return-jurisdiction clause whole.”
  • U.S. v. Sansbury, 22-30114, appeal from E.D. La.
    • Engelhardt, J. (Higginbotham, Smith, Engelhardt), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming four-level enhancement for abduction in sentencing of defendant who zip-tied a CVS cashier’s hands together and closed him the restroom in the course of committing an armed robbery of the store.

Unpublished

  • U.S. v. Ibarra-Quintero, 22-10761, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Graves, Ho), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Miller, 22-10915, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Duncan, Wilson), criminal, sentencing, guilty plea
    • Affirming guilty plea conviction and sentence for production of child pornography.
  • U.S. v. De La Cerda, 22-10952, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Graves, Ho), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.
  • U.S. v. Gautreaux, 22-20554, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Haynes, Oldham), criminal, compassionate release
    • Affirming denial of motion for compassionate release.
  • U.S. v. Merritt, 22-30621, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Graves, Ho), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Reynolds v. Wood County, 22-40381, appeal from E.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Southwick, Willett), qualified immunity, municipal liability
    • Affirming summary judgment dismissal of individual officer defendants and municipal liability claim against county arising from officers’ placement of plaintiff detainee in restraint chair for 14 hours and allowing him to urinate on himself.
  • U.S. v. Powell, 22-50294, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Duncan, Wilson), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and 420-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine.
  • U.S. v. Roman, 22-50991, c/w 22-51010, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Davis, Smith, Douglas), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.
  • U.S. v. Holguin, 22-51090, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Duncan, Wilson), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.
  • Hernandez v. Erazo, 23-50281, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (King, Jones, Smith), stay, Hague Convention
    • Denying stay of district court order granting a petition for return of minor child to his father in Mexico under the Hague Convention.