May 29-30, 2025, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • Jane Does 1-5 v. Obiano, 24-20075, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • Duncan, J. (Haynes, Duncan, Wilson), foreign official immunity, Torture Victim Protection Act
    • Affirming dismissal of TVPA claims against former Nigerian governor under foreign official immunity.
    • In this case, the widows of men killed by Nigerian military forces during rallies in 2020 sued former Nigerian governor Willie Obiano in a Texas federal court under the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA). They alleged that Obiano ordered the attacks in his official capacity as governor. The district court dismissed the lawsuit, holding that Obiano was entitled to foreign official immunity under common law, and the plaintiffs appealed. On appeal, they raised only one preserved argument: that the TVPA implicitly overrides such immunity.
    • The Fifth Circuit affirmed the dismissal, explaining that under Samantar v. Yousuf, foreign officials can still claim immunity under common law even after the enactment of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), which governs only foreign states, not individuals. The district court properly applied the Samantar two-step framework and found that Obiano qualified for conduct-based immunity because he was acting in his official role at the time of the alleged shootings. The court also rejected the idea of a jus cogens exception (for violations of fundamental international norms) to this immunity, noting that most circuits decline to recognize such an exception.
    • The Fifth Circuit further held that the TVPA does not abrogate foreign official immunity. Citing precedent, it emphasized that statutes are presumed to retain common-law principles unless Congress clearly states otherwise. Since the TVPA contains no express language removing immunity, the court concluded that immunity remains intact. The plaintiffs’ assertion that immunity renders the TVPA meaningless was dismissed as unconvincing, with the court pointing out that similar arguments have failed under § 1983. Thus, the court upheld the dismissal, affirming that the TVPA does not override well-established common-law immunities.
  • Ad Hoc Group of Senior Secured Noteholders v. Delaware Trust Co., 23-20557, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • Jones, J. (Jones, Engelhardt, Oldham), bankruptcy
    • Vacating approval of reorganization plan.
    • In this case, the Fifth Circuit reviewed a bankruptcy court’s decision in the reorganization of Sanchez Energy Corporation, which had filed for Chapter 11 protection in 2019. The bankruptcy court approved a plan that restructured the company into Mesquite Energy and allocated equity among creditors. After litigation about the validity of liens held by secured creditors, the bankruptcy court deemed those liens avoidable and awarded unsecured creditors nearly 70% of Mesquite’s equity based on a hypothetical valuation of the avoided liens. The secured creditors appealed, arguing this allocation violated the Bankruptcy Code’s limits on recovery in avoidance actions.
    • The core legal issue was whether the bankruptcy court violated Sections 550(a) and (d) of the Bankruptcy Code, which govern recovery for avoided transfers and mandate “only a single satisfaction.” The court held that returning the secured creditors’ liens to the estate constituted a full recovery under Section 550. Therefore, awarding a hypothetical value on top of that return resulted in a double recovery, which Section 550(d) prohibits. The Fifth Circuit emphasized that the Code allows a choice between recovering the property or its value, not both.
    • The court rejected the argument that the reorganization plan permitted hypothetical valuation regardless of the statutory rules. Instead, it found that the plan clearly preserved defenses and required adherence to applicable bankruptcy law, including Sections 547 and 550. The court pointed out that plan provisions were contingent on litigation outcomes, and the valuation of preference actions could only occur if those actions prevailed under proper legal standards. Because the secured creditors returned their liens, the estate had already received its single satisfaction.
    • Ultimately, the Fifth Circuit vacated the bankruptcy court’s judgment and remanded the case. It concluded that the unsecured creditors were not entitled to equity based on a valuation of liens that had already been returned to the estate. By giving them that equity, the bankruptcy court erred in applying the Bankruptcy Code. The ruling reinforces that avoidance actions cannot be used to inflate recoveries beyond what the law allows, especially in cases involving depreciating or disputed assets like oil and gas leases.
  • Texas Medical Association v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 23-40605, appeal from E.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (en banc), administrative law, en banc
    • Ordering en banc rehearing of October 30, 2024, panel opinion (Southwick, Haynes, Douglas, JJ.) reversing in part and affirming in part district court’s ruling on plaintiff healthcare providers’ and air-ambulance providers’ challenge to HHS rules regarding the No Surprises Act, reversing vacatur of rule regarding how to calculate “qualifying payment amount” under the NSA, affirming vacatur of deadline provision in the rules, and affirming district court’s holding that certain disclosure requirements are not arbitrary and capricious.

Unpublished decisions

  • U.S. v. Barrow, 24-10157, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Jones, Oldham), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming 60-month sentence on revocation of supervised release.
  • U.S. v. Moore, 24-10903, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jolly, Graves, Oldham), criminal
    • Affirming conviction of possession of a firearm by a felon.
  • U.S. v. Brown, 24-30214, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Graves, Engelhardt, Oldham), Graves, J., dissenting; criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming 42-month sentence on conviction of machinegun possession.
    • Judge Graves dissented “[b]ecause this sentence amounts to a near-life sentence, did not account for relevant factors, and the justifications for varying upward lack support in the record.”
  • U.S. v. Porter, 24-30563, appeal from E.D. La.
    • per curiam (Haynes, Higginson, Oldham), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Thomas v. Fontenot, 24-30671, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Haynes, Higginson, Douglas), sec. 1983, service of process
    • Remanding to district court to determine if service of process was made on defendants.
  • U.S. v. Xol, 24-40605, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Stewart, Duncan), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.
  • U.S. v. Koerner, 24-40646, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Stewart, Duncan), criminal, sentence reduction
    • Affirming denial of motion to terminate supervised release.
  • U.S. v. Tart, 24-40758, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Graves, Willett, Wilson), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Ramos-Ortega, 24-40794, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Graves, Willett, Wilson), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Diaz-Maldonado, 24-60272, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Graves, Willett, Wilson), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Hernandez, 24-50575, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Elrod, Haynes, Duncan), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Gutierrez-Corona, 23-50839, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Barksdale, Stewart, Ramirez), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming sentence on conviction of illegal reentry.
  • Mays v. Newly Weds Foods, Inc., 24-60161, appeal from N.D. Miss.
    • per curiam (Ho, Engelhardt, Douglas), civil
    • Affirming district court judgment in favor of defendant, with no description or detail provided as to the type of case or basis for appeal.
  • Islam v. Bondi, 24-60422, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Barksdale, Stewart, Ramirez), immigration
    • Denying Bangladeshi citizen’s petition for review of BIA decision dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture.
  • Sorto v. Guerrero, 22-70013, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Dennis, Southwick, Ho), habeas corpus
    • Vacating district court order declining to rule on Atkins claim, and remanding for consideration of newly discovered evidence.