Take the Fifth

We report after each month on interesting statistics from the data we generate from the daily opinion summaries from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and at the end of each court year (Oct.-Sept.) we will aggregate that–all of which provides useful insights into the inner workings of the Court, the relative success of various appeals, and more.

The January 2025 statistics are based on 174 total opinions released by the Court (10 more than in the previous month).

Where the appeals are coming from

• The Middle District of Louisiana and the Eastern District of Texas had perfect affirmance rates in decisions issued by the Fifth Circuit in January 2025. The Middle District of Louisiana had 5 full affirmances (or appeal dismissals) on Fifth Circuit decisions originating from there; and the Eastern District of Texas had 14 full affirmances/appeal dismissals, plus 1 released decision denying a motion.
• The Northern District of Texas was the district with the most decisions originating from there in January, 38 total decisions. From the district, 36 of those were full affirmances or appeal dismissals; 1 was a full reversal; and 1 was a published denial of en banc rehearing.
• From the Western District of Texas, 22 decisions were full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 were partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 3 were full reversals; 1 was a full vacatur; and 1 was a published denial of en banc rehearing.
• From decisions from the Southern District of Texas there were 25 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 1 full reversal; and 3 full vacaturs.
• From the Eastern District of Louisiana there were 13 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 1 full reversal; 1 full vacatur; and 1 published denial of en banc rehearing.
• From the Western District of Louisiana, there were 7 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 1 full reversal; and 2 full vacaturs.
• From the Southern District of Mississippi, there were 3 full affirmances; 2 full reversals; and 1 full vacatur.
• From the Northern District of Mississippi, there were 1 full affirmance; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; and 1 full reversal.
• From petitions for review of Board of Immigration Appeal decisions, there were 10 denials; and 3 grants.
• From appeals of or petitions for review of other agency actions, there were 2 grants of petitions for review of an agency orders.

What the appeals are about, and who they benefit

• The largest number of appeals were of criminal conviction and/or sentencing issues. 80 resulted in full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 3 were partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 2 were full reversals; and 4 were full vacaturs. 80 of the dispositions favored the prosecution, and 9 favored the defendant.
• In post-conviction relief cases, including state and federal habeas petitions, there were 2 full affirmances; 2 full reversals; and 1 denial of a motion. 4 dispositions favored the government; and 1 favored the petitioner.
• In immigration cases, there were 10 dismissals/denials of petitions for review of Board of Immigration Appeals orders; and 3 grants of petitions for review of BIA orders. 10 dispositions favored the government; and 3 dispositions favored the immigrant.
• In prisoner suits, there were 8 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 1 published denial of en banc rehearing. 8 dispositions favored the government defendants; and 1 favored the prisoner.
• In commercial – civil cases, there were 14 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 1 full reversal; and 1 full vacatur. 12 of the dispositions favored the defendant, and 5 favored the plaintiff.
• In civil rights/constitutional claims (non-prisoner-suits), there were 8 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 2 full reversals; and 1 full vacatur. 10 of the dispositions favored the defendant, and 3 favored the plaintiff.
• In employment/labor law cases, there were 4 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; and 2 full vacaturs. 4 of the dispositions favored an employer, and 3 favored the employees.
• In qualified immunity cases, there were 4 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 full reversal; and 1 published denial of en banc rehearing. 4 dispositions favored the government defendants, and 2 favored the plaintiffs.
• In personal injury/non-commercial tort cases, there were 3 full affirmances/appeal dismissals. All 3 dispositions favored the defendant.
• In administrative law cases, there were 2 full affirmances; and 2 grants of petitions to review agency actions. 1 disposition favored the defendant/agency; and 3 favored the challengers.
• In bankruptcy cases, there was 1 full affirmance. That one disposition favored the debtor.
• In arbitration cases, there were 2 full reversals. Both dispositions favored the defendant.
• In tax law cases, there was 1 full affirmance. That one disposition favored the government.
• In maritime law cases, there was 1 full affirmance. That 1 disposition favored the defendant.
• In environmental law/toxic tort cases, there was 1 full affirmance. That one disposition favored the defendant.
• In healthcare law suits (ACA challenges, vaccine mandate challenges, etc.), there was 1 full affirmance; and 1 published denial of en banc rehearing. Both dispositions favored the government.

How much law is being made?

• Of the 174 opinions released by the 5th Circuit in January 2025, 38 were designated for publication. 17 of those were full affirmances; 4 were partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 9 were full reversals; 3 were published denials of en banc rehearing; 2 were grants of petitions for review of BIA decisions; 2 were grants of petitions for review of agency orders; and 1 was a denial of a motion.
• 136 of the January opinions were unpublished, including 113 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 3 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 1 full reversal; 8 full vacaturs; 10 denials/dismissals of petitions to review BIA orders; and 1 grant of a petition for review of a BIA order.

Who was doing what on the Court?

Who was the busiest, in that they were on the most panels issuing opinions in January? (Judge Haynes). Who was the busiest writer, authoring the most attributed opinions (including majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions)? (Judge Haynes, with 5). Who concurred the most in separate opinions? (Judges Haynes, Higginson, Ho, and Duncan, with 1 concurring opinion each, plus one more concurrence without an opinion by Judge Haynes). Who authored the most dissenting or dubitante opinions? (Judge Haynes, Higginson, and Ho, with 2 each). How many opinions did the Court issue per curiam, with no author listed? (135, with 133 of those unpublished). Who participated in making the most law, participating in the most panels with published opinions? (Judge Higginson, with 13). We have all that below (senior-status judges in italics):

Judge	On panel	In majority	Author majority	Author concur	Author dissent/ dubitante	Published	Unpublished
Elrod	13	12	3	1		9	4
Jones	35	33	1			8	27
Smith	25	23	3			11	14
Stewart	28	28	2	(1 w/o op.)		7	21
Richman	17	15	4			8	9
Southwick	25	25	2			6	19
Haynes	45	43	2	1 (+1 w/o op.)	2	10	35
Graves	24	24	1			8	16
Higginson	30	28	1	1	2	13	17
Willett	26	26	3			9	17
Ho	23	20	1	1	2	5	18
Duncan	32	30	2	1		10	22
Engelhardt	16	15				3	13
Oldham	36	34	1		1	6	30
Wilson	26	25	2			5	21
Douglas	25	25				8	17
Ramirez	34	34	1			9	25
Dist. Ct. Judge sitting by designation	12	12	2			5	7
King	13	13				1	12
Jolly	13	13				1	12
Higginbotham	11	11	2			1	10
Davis	10	10				1	9
Wiener	9	9					9
Barksdale	12	12	1			2	10
Dennis	18	18	1			5	13
Clement	5	5	2			5
Unattributed/ Clerk
per curiam			135			2	133

Conclusions? Most decisions in January, as always, were unanimous, with 8 dissents and 6 concurrences out of 174 opinions. Among senior-status judges, Judges Dennis, King, and Holly had the heaviest participation in panels. Meanwhile, among active-status judges, the lightest production in January was from Chief Judge Elrod and Judge Engelhardt.

Wrap it all together, and an opinion in January 2025 was most likely to be an unpublished per curiam affirming a criminal decision from the Northern District of Texas, with Judges Haynes, Oldham, and Jones on the panel.