Take the Fifth

Designated for publication

• U.S. v. Allen-Shinn, 24-30685, appeal from W.D. La.
  • Ho, J. (Haynes, Ho, Oldham), criminal, restitution
  • Affirming judgment that defendant’s service-connected payments were not exempt from garnishment to pay restitution order.
  • The Fifth Circuit affirmed a writ of garnishment on $46,084.49 in Christopher Allen-Shinn’s USAA account to satisfy $92,500 in restitution from his child-pornography conviction, holding that 26 U.S.C. § 6334(a)(10)’s exemption for service-connected disability benefits covers only amounts “payable” in the future, not funds already received and deposited. Applying abuse-of-discretion review to the garnishment order and de novo review to the statutory question, the court explained that the MVRA allows the government to garnish all property except that exempt under § 6334(a), and joined the nationwide consensus of federal courts—including unpublished appellate decisions—that “payable” means due in the future. Because Allen-Shinn received the disability payments before the garnishment writ issued, the money was not exempt; his argument that receipt after arrest should change the outcome lacked statutory or precedential support. Accordingly, the district court’s order and the government’s garnishment were affirmed.

• Fugedi v. Initram, Inc., 24-40283, appeal from S.D. Tex.
  • Duncan, J. (Elrod, Duncan, Engelhardt), jurisdiction
  • Affirming dismissal of suit for lack of diversity jurisdiction on finding that plaintiff had been appointed as a sham trustee in order to improperly manufacture diversity of citizenship.
  • In a long-running dispute over property at 829 Yale Street in Houston, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, holding that 28 U.S.C. § 1359 bars using a trust to manufacture diversity jurisdiction. The court explained that § 1359’s text—prohibiting jurisdiction created “by assignment or otherwise”—encompasses trusts, that only a trustee’s citizenship counts for diversity, and that courts may look past a trustee’s citizenship when there is sham or collusion, citing Supreme Court and circuit precedent. Reviewing legal issues de novo and factual findings for clear error, the panel upheld the district court’s determination that trustee Nicholas Fugedi was appointed solely to create diversity, noting facts such as his brief acquaintance with the beneficiary, his lack of control and qualifications, the wholly local nature of the dispute, and the absence of any non-collusive reason to select an out-of-state trustee. Accordingly, the judgment was affirmed.

• McRaney v. The North American Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, Inc., 23-60494, appeal from N.D. Miss.
  • Oldham, J. (Richman, Oldham, Ramirez), Ramirez, J., dissenting; employment, personal torts, church autonomy doctrine, First Amendment
  • Affirming summary judgment dismissal of claims by former executive director of church organization arising from his termination due to what he alleged to have been defamatorily expressed motives, under the church autonomy doctrine under the First Amendment.
  • The Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the North American Mission Board (NAMB) of the Southern Baptist Convention, holding that Pastor Will McRaney’s employment-related tort claims are barred by the First Amendment’s church autonomy doctrine. Because adjudicating his claims would require secular courts to intrude on matters of faith, doctrine, and internal governance, the panel concluded that no court may entertain them. The opinion frames the dispute squarely within church autonomy rather than ordinary employment law.
  • The court recounts that Southern Baptist bodies are non-hierarchical and autonomous yet cooperate through shared doctrine and mission. NAMB and the Baptist Convention of Maryland/Delaware (BCMD) entered a Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA) “steeped in religious doctrine,” aimed at fulfilling the Great Commission through church planting and evangelism and aligned with the Baptist Faith & Message (2000). McRaney, an ordained minister serving as BCMD’s Executive Director, clashed with NAMB over how to carry out the SPA (e.g., missionary selection, funding, and work requirements). After NAMB noticed termination of the SPA, BCMD unanimously fired McRaney, citing spiritual and leadership concerns; McRaney then publicly criticized NAMB, which led to speaking disinvitations and NAMB’s internal security measures (including a “no-entry” photo at the reception desk of NAMB’s offices).
  • McRaney sued NAMB in 2017 for tortious interference, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The district court initially denied dismissal but later granted summary judgment on church autonomy grounds; an earlier Fifth Circuit panel had remanded as premature while allowing reconsideration after discovery. On the renewed motion, the district court again concluded the claims would impermissibly delve into church matters; the Fifth Circuit now affirms that outcome, clarifying the proper doctrinal framing and remedy.
  • The court surveys the church autonomy doctrine’s deep historical roots and modern strands: (1) the ministerial exception (selection and dismissal of faith leaders); (2) nonreviewability of religious doctrine and scriptural questions; (3) deference to churches on governance, discipline, membership, and polity; and (4) protection for internal ecclesiastical communications. Although the doctrine does not create blanket immunity from all secular laws, it safeguards internal management decisions essential to a religious institution’s mission and forbids courts from resolving disputes that turn on religious criteria—even when pleaded as neutral torts or contracts.
  • Addressing confusion over “jurisdictional” labeling, the court explains that church autonomy functions like a structural constitutional immunity from suit that must be resolved at the threshold and permits immediate appellate review, but it is not a Rule 12(b)(1) defect requiring dismissal without prejudice. Treating it as a merits defense (akin to qualified immunity) best protects religious independence and ensures preclusive effect across courts. The opinion emphasizes denominational neutrality: autonomy protections apply equally to non-hierarchical Baptists as to hierarchical traditions.
  • On the merits, all of McRaney’s claims fail. His pre-termination theories would force a secular court to evaluate religious criteria embedded in the SPA and to judge whether his leadership and conformity to evangelical objectives were sufficiently “Christ-like”—precisely what the doctrine forbids; the ministerial exception independently bars suits that would “litigate the employment relationship” between a minister and religious bodies, even when brought against a partnering entity rather than the direct employer. His post-termination theories (missed ministry jobs, speaking disinvitations, and NAMB’s no-entry photo) likewise cannot be adjudicated without intruding on other ministries’ selection of messengers and internal discipline or security decisions. Having endured years of discovery already, NAMB is entitled to the protection church autonomy guarantees. The judgment for NAMB is affirmed.
  • Judge Ramirez dissented, contending that William McRaney’s tort claims against the North American Mission Board (NAMB)—for interference with contract and prospective relations, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress—are secular disputes that do not implicate church governance or religious doctrine and thus should not be barred by the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine. After BCMD and NAMB entered a Strategic Partnership Agreement in 2012, conflicts arose when NAMB accused McRaney, BCMD’s executive director, of unilaterally acting contrary to the Agreement, prompting NAMB to send a termination letter and BCMD to fire McRaney (a firing later followed by NAMB’s rescission of its termination letter to BCMD). McRaney sued, alleging NAMB spread falsehoods that triggered his termination and later blacklisted him. Although the district court twice dismissed on ecclesiastical-abstention grounds, the dissent emphasizes Baptist polity is non-hierarchical: there is no unified “Baptist Church” with superior tribunals, so this is not an intra-church governance dispute of the kind Watson, Kedroff, or Milivojevich protect.
  • Applying neutral tort principles would not entangle courts in theology, the dissent maintains. The pre-termination claims turn on whether NAMB intentionally and unjustifiably interfered with McRaney’s contract and defamed him by asserting he breached the Agreement or “ruined” BCMD—questions of intent, truth, publication, causation, and damages, not doctrine. The post-termination claims (alleged blacklisting, a posted “no-entry” photo, statements that he resigned or sought to enrich himself) likewise present secular issues; only a stray reference to “biblical reconciliation” might touch religious terminology, but determining falsity of other statements requires no doctrinal inquiry. Because neither “church government” nor “faith and doctrine” need be adjudicated to resolve these claims, the dissent would allow McRaney’s suit to proceed and disagrees with affirming summary judgment for NAMB.

Unpublished decisions

• Sims v. Dallas Independent School District, 24-10189, appeal from N.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Higginson, Willett, Engalhardt), municipal liability
  • Affirming dismissal of survivors’ suit against school district arising from the death of a teacher’s assistance after an attack by a student.

• U.S. v. McGrady, 25-10256, appeal from N.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Jones, Duncan, Douglas), criminal
  • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.

• Matthews v. Chandler, 25-10272, appeal from N.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Richman, Southwick, Willett), habeas corpus
  • Dismissing for lack of jurisdiction appeal from denial of sec. 2241 petition challenging petitioner’s prison disciplinary conviction and resulting loss of 27 days of good-time credits.

• U.S. v. Ortega, 25-10472, appeal from N.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (King, Haynes, Ho), criminal
  • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.

• U.S. v. Tovar-Arguello, 25-10477, appeal from N.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (King, Haynes, Ho), criminal
  • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.

• U.S. v. Mendez-Valadez, 25-10499, appeal from N.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Richman, Southwick, Willett), criminal
  • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.

• U.S. v. Zamora-Rios, 25-10500, appeal from N.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Richman, Southwick, Willett), criminal, sentencing
  • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.

• U.S. v. Tovar-Gonzalez, 24-10800, appeal from N.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Haynes, Ho, Oldham), criminal, sentencing
  • Affirming 46-month sentence and conviction for illegal reentry.

• U.S. v. Penaloza-Torres, 25-20077, appeal from S.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Higginbotham, Engelhardt, Ramirez), criminal
  • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.

• Ford v. ConocoPhillips, 22-20334, appeal from S.D. Tex.
  • Richman, J. (Richman, Haynes, Graves), Haynes, J., concurring in judgment only (w/or opinion); arbitration
  • Vacating orders denying company’s motions to compel arbitration of employed contractor’s FLSA claims, where contractor’s agreement with his consulting firm employer incorporated by reference an agreement between the consulting firm and the company against which contractor brought his FLSA claims.

• Doe v. Trevino, 24-20361, appeal from S.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Haynes, Ho, Oldham), qualified immunity
  • Affirming qualified immunity summary judgment in favor of defendant constable to sec. 1983 suit brought by victim of sexual assault by deputy constable.

• U.S. v. Munoz-Zamarripa, 25-40148, appeal from S.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (King, Haynes, Ho), criminal
  • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.

• U.S. v. Gonzalez-Contreras, 25-50156, appeal from W.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Richman, Southwick, Willett), criminal, sentencing
  • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.

• U.S. v. Goodley, 25-50200, appeal from W.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (King, Haynes, Ho), criminal
  • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.

• U.S. v. Dubuisson, 24-50509, appeal from W.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Jones, Stewart, Ramirez), criminal, supervised release
  • Vacating two special mental health conditions of supervised release term, and remanding for resentencing.

• Story v. Gravell, 24-50646, appeal from W.D. Tex.
  • per curiam (Davis, Wilson, Douglas), First Amendment
  • Affirming dismissal of plaintiff’s First and Fourth Amendment claims following his arrest and subsequent ejection from school board meeting for violating an order that he not hinder official proceedings through disorderly conduct.

• Okorie v. University Mall, L.L.C., 25-60185, appeal from S.D. Miss.
  • per curiam (Davis, Wilson, Douglas), foreclosure
  • Affirming dismissal of plaintiff’s federal-law claims arising from non-judicial foreclosure sale of commercial property.

• Requena v. Bondi, 24-60663, petition for review of BIA order
  • per curiam (Richman, Southwick, Willett), immigration
  • Denying Mexican citizen’s petition for review of BIA order upholding the denial of his application for cancellation of removal.