September 29, 2025, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • Savage v. Westcott, 22-30125, appeal from M.D. La.
    • Richman, J. (Richman, Haynes, Graves), prisoner suit, qualified immunity
    • Reversing denial of qualified immunity to prison official defendants on inmate’s claims that prison official defendants unlawfully confiscated his earnings from sale of leather belts at Angola Prison Rodeo and deprived him of due process.
    • Gregory Savage, an inmate at Angola Prison, sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after prison officials deducted around $16,000 from his earnings from selling leather belts at the Angola Prison Rodeo. Savage alleged that these deductions, justified as taxes, fees, and commissions, were unauthorized and that officials conspired to deny him due process by obstructing both the prison grievance system and his state-court mandamus petition. He named multiple officials, including the warden, attorneys, and wardens’ assistants, accusing them of knowingly participating in or concealing the scheme. He sought declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief. The district court dismissed some claims but allowed conspiracy and due process claims to proceed, denying qualified immunity to the officials, which prompted their interlocutory appeal.
    • On appeal, the Fifth Circuit reversed in part. The court held that Savage had not properly raised a pre-deprivation due process claim and that the officials were entitled to qualified immunity on that ground. As for post-deprivation due process, the court concluded that it was not clearly established at the time that Savage had a constitutional property interest in the proceeds from prison craft sales, even though later precedent recognized due process rights in inmate trust accounts. Because the law was unsettled, the officials were shielded by qualified immunity. The court limited its review to that issue, noting that Savage’s requests for declaratory and injunctive relief raised separate questions not before the panel.

Unpublished decisions

  • Yang v. Roper, 25-10183, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Clement, Southwick, Oldham), jurisdiction
    • Affirming in part and dismissing in part appeal from district court’s dismissal of suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
  • U.S. v. Dorsey, 25-10308, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Graves, Oldham), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Jackson, 24-10531, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (King, Haynes, Ho), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Yan v. State Bar of Texas, 24-10543, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Elrod, Clement, Haynes), appellate jurisdiction
    • Dismissing for lack of appellate jurisdiction appeal from district court order that purported to dismiss claims against all defendants, but did not address or adjudicate claims against one of the defendants who had not filed a motion to dismiss.
  • Lee v. Southwest Airlines Co., 24-20346, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Elrod, Clement, Haynes), sanctions
    • Affirming dismissal of plaintiff’s employment discrimination case as sanction under FRCP 37 and 41 for then-pro se (after three different counsel enrolled and withdrew from her representation) failure to comply with court orders.
  • U.S. v. Amaya-Argueta, 24-20565, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Elrod, Clement, Haynes), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming sentence on conviction of illegal reentry.
  • Bruce v. ACA Residential, L.L.C., 25-30142, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Clement, Richman, Willett), Americans with Disabilities Act, sec. 1983
    • Affirming dismissal of plaintiff’s ADA and constitutional claims against state court and its officials after losing state suit against company whose employee drove truck over his lawn.
  • Odem v. Townsend, 25-40333, appeal from E.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Graves, Ho, Douglas), prisoner suit
    • Dismissing as frivolous Texas state prisoner’s appeal from dismissal of his sec. 1983 claims.
  • U.S. v. Talamantes-Romero, 24-50254, c/w 24-50266, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Elrod, Clement, Haynes), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.
  • U.S. v. Lee, 25-60100, appeal from S.D. Miss.
    • per curiam (Smith, Higginson, Wilson), criminal
    • Affirming conviction of possession of a firearm by a felon.
  • Servin v. Bondi, 24-60612, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Smith, Willett, Wilson), immigration
    • Dismissing petition for review of BIA denial of application for cancellation of removal.
  • Avalos-Caseres v. Bondi, 24-60631, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Barksdale, Oldham, Douglas), immigration
    • Dismissing in part and denying in part Salvadoran citizen’s petition for review of BIA order denying his September 2023 second motion to reopen his proceedings.