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 April 2025 statistics are based on 201 total opinions released by the Court (7 more than in the previous month). While I did not post daily summaries of all of the opinions released in the first half of April as I was recovering from my bad March bike wreck (see March statistics post for explanation of that), I did harvest the information from all April opinions for purposes of reporting these statistics:

Where the appeals are coming from

• Three district courts within the Fifth Circuit logged perfect affirmance rates in April 2025, with all opinions in the Fifth released during he month that originated from those districts being affirmances: the Western District of Louisiana, with 13 affirmances or appeal dismissals; the Northern District of Mississippi, with 2 affirmances; and the Eastern District of Texas, with 15 affirmances/appeal dismissals.
• The Northern District of Texas was the district with the most decisions originating from there in February, 59 total decisions. From the district, 54 of those were full affirmances or appeal dismissals; 1 was a partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 4 full vacaturs; and 1 certification to the state supreme court.
• From the Western District of Texas, 42 decisions were full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 full reversal; and 1 full vacatur.
• From decisions from the Southern District of Texas there were 40 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 3 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 4 full reversals; and 2 full vacaturs.
• From the Eastern District of Louisiana there were 5 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; and 2 full reversals.
• From the Middle District of Louisiana, there were 5 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 grant of mandamus; and 1 order of en banc rehearing.
• From the Southern District of Mississippi, there were 10 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 full reversals; and 2 full vacaturs.
• From petitions for review of Board of Immigration Appeal decisions, there were 10 denials.
• From petitions for review of other agency decisions, there was 1 grant of a petition for review.

What the appeals are about, and who they benefit

• The largest number of appeals were of criminal conviction and/or sentencing issues. 121 resulted in full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 was a partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 1 was a full reversal; and 4 were full vacaturs. 122 of the dispositions favored the prosecution, and 5 favored the defendant.
• In post-conviction relief cases, including state and federal habeas petitions, there were 6 full affirmances. All 6 dispositions favored the government.
• In immigration cases, there were 10 dismissals/denials of petitions for review of Board of Immigration Appeals orders. All 10 dispositions favored the government.
• In prisoner suits, there were 8 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 full vacatur; and 1 order of en banc rehearing. 9 dispositions favored the government defendants; and 1 favored the prisoner.
• In commercial – civil cases, there were 14 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 1 full reversal. 11 of the dispositions favored the defendant, and 4 favored the plaintiff.
• In civil rights/constitutional claims (non-prisoner-suits), there were 7 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 2 full reversals; 1 grant of mandamus; 2 full vacaturs; and 1 certification to a state supreme court. 10 of the dispositions favored the defendant, and 4 favored the plaintiff.
• In employment/labor law cases, there were 12 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs. 12 of the dispositions favored an employer; and 2 favored the employee.
• In qualified immunity cases, there were 2 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 2 full reversals; and 1 full vacatur. 5 dispositions favored the government defendants, and 1 favored the plaintiffs.
• In personal injury/non-commercial tort cases, there were 5 full affirmances/appeal dismissals. 4 dispositions favored the defendant; and 1 favored the plaintiff.
• In administrative law cases, there were 2 full affirmances; and 1 grant of a petition for review. 2 dispositions favored the defendant/agency; and 1 favored the challengers.
• In bankruptcy cases, there were 4 full affirmances; and 1 full vacatur. 4 dispositions favored the creditor; and 1 disposition favored the debtor.
• In social security cases, there were 2 full affirmances. All dispositions favored the government.
• In arbitration cases, there was 1 affirmance; and 1 full reversal. 1 disposition favored a defendant; and 1 disposition favored a plaintiff.
• In environmental law/toxic torts decisions, there were 2 full reversals. Both dispositions favored the plaintiff.
• In products liability cases, there were 2 full affirmances. Both dispositions favored the defendant.

How much law is being made?

• Of the 201 opinions released by the 5th Circuit in April 2025, 36 were designated for publication. 20 of those were full affirmances; 3 were partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 5 were full reversals; 1 was a grant of mandamus; 3 were full vacaturs; 1 was a certification to a state supreme court; 1 was an order of en banc rehearing; and 1 was a grant of a petition for agency review.
• 188 of the April opinions were unpublished, including 166 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 3 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 3 full reversals; 6 full vacaturs; and 10 denials/dismissals of petitions to review BIA orders.

Who was doing what on the Court?

Who was the busiest, in that they were on the most panels issuing opinions in April? (Judge Oldham). Who was the busiest writer, authoring the most attributed opinions (including majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions)? (Judges Higginbotham, Stewart, Richman, and Higginson, with 5 each). Who concurred the most in separate opinions? (Judges Ho and Engelhardt, with 2 each). Who authored the most dissenting or dubitante opinions? (Judge Graves, with 2). How many opinions did the Court issue per curiam, with no author listed? (171, with 169 of those unpublished). Who participated in making the most law, participating in the most panels with published opinions? (Judge Higginson, with 10). 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	17	16				6	11
Jones	37	37	1			5	32
Smith	30	30	1			7	23
Stewart	37	37	5			8	29
Richman	13	12	4		1	6	7
Southwick	27	27				5	22
Haynes	34	33		(1 w/o op.)	1	8	26
Graves	40	37	1		2	4	36
Higginson	33	32	4		1	10	23
Willett	38	37	1			5	33
Ho	31	31	1	2		6	25
Duncan	32	32	2			8	24
Engelhardt	22	22				1	21
Oldham	51	51	2	2		7	44
Wilson	34	34	4			7	27
Douglas	22	20	3		1	6	16
Ramirez	33	33	2			3	30
Dist. Ct. Judge sitting by designation	3	3	1			1	2
King	17	17				2	15
Jolly	15	15					15
Higginbotham	29	29	5			6	23
Davis	10	10				2	8
Wiener	21	21				2	19
Barksdale	8	8					8
Dennis	13	12	1		1	2	11
Clement	11	11	3			3	8
Unattributed/ Clerk
per curiam			171			2	169

Conclusions? Most decisions in April, as always, were unanimous, with 7 dissents and 5 concurrences out of 201 opinions. Among senior-status judges, Judges Wiener, Higginbotham, and King had the heaviest participation in panels, with as much as some of the active-status judges. Meanwhile, among active-status judges, the lightest production in April was from Judge Richman.

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