February 10, 2026, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • Navy v. School Board of St. Mary Parish, 25-30075, appeal from W.D. La.
    • Smith, J. (Elrod, Smith, Wilson) (oral argument), civil rights, injunction, appellate jurisdiction
    • Dismissing for lack of appellate jurisdiction appeal from denial of motion to dismiss or strike plaintiffs’ motion to modify a desegregation injunction for the Parish School Board.
    • The case arises from a long-running school desegregation injunction imposed on the School Board of St. Mary Parish in 1965. In 2019, new class representatives stepped in and sought to modify or expand the injunction decades after most enforcement had lapsed, prompting the Board to file motions to dissolve the injunction under Rule 60(b)(5) and to dismiss or strike the plaintiffs’ motion for further relief. The district court denied the Board’s motion to dismiss or strike and also barred presentation of evidence under Rule 60(b)(5) at an evidentiary hearing, leading the Board to appeal those interlocutory orders.
    • On appeal, the Fifth Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). The panel held that neither the denial of the Board’s motion to dismiss or strike nor the related February order had the practical effect of granting, continuing, modifying, refusing, or dissolving the injunction—an essential predicate for interlocutory appeal. Because those orders merely maintained the status quo and did not directly affect the existing injunction’s operation or its dissolution, the court concluded it had no jurisdiction to review them and did not reach the merits of the Board’s challenges.
  • Parrott v. International Bancshares Corp., 25-50367, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • Smith, J. (Elrod, Smith, Wilson) (oral argument), arbitration, ERISA, breach of fiduciary duty
    • Reversing denial of motion to compel arbitration on ERISA claims, affirming as to individual claims, voiding a standard-of-review provision for purposes of breach-of-fiduciary-duty claims, and remanding for further proceedings.
    • In this ERISA case, the plaintiff, Paul Parrott, sued his former employer’s retirement plan fiduciaries for breaching their fiduciary duties under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(2)-(3), alleging that those breaches reduced his plan distribution. After he left the company, the plan sponsor unilaterally amended the plan to add a retroactive arbitration clause requiring all “Covered Claims” to be arbitrated individually, forbidding class or representative proceedings, and waiving jury trials. The district court refused to compel arbitration, concluding under Texas law that there was no valid consideration for the arbitration agreement because Parrott had not personally agreed to it.
    • On appeal, the Fifth Circuit held that arbitration could be enforced as to Parrott’s § 1132(a)(2) plan-based claims because, under ERISA and persuasive authority from other circuits, the plan itself—through its broad unilateral amendment provision—effectively “consented” to arbitration and thus bound plan participants for plan-centric claims. However, the court agreed with the district court that the arbitration clause could not be forced for Parrott’s purely individual claims since he never personally consented, and IBC had not adequately briefed that issue.
    • The Fifth Circuit also found that certain terms of the arbitration clause violated the effective vindication doctrine. Specifically, provisions barring representative or class arbitrations and limiting recovery to “individual relief” conflicted with ERISA’s statutory scheme—under § 1132(a)(2) and § 1109 the plan’s fiduciary duty remedies are inherently plan-wide and not purely individual.

Unpublished decisions

  • U.S. v. Higginbotham, 25-10568, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Graves, Oldham) (no oral argument), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a felon.
  • U.S. v. Nguyen, 25-10742, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Richman, Southwick, Willett) (no oral argument), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Brown, 25-10759, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Richman, Southwick, Willett) (no oral argument), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Easter, 25-10803, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (King, Haynes, Ho) (no oral argument), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Yearwood, 25-10858, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Richman, Southwick, Willett) (no oral argument), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Lattimore, 25-10906, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Richman, Southwick, Willett) (no oral argument), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • 8300 Buckeye Delaware, L.L.C. v. UPS Supply Chain Solutions, Inc., 24-10948, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Davis, Stewart, Ramirez) (oral argument), landlord-tenant, breach of contract
    • Reversing summary judgment in favor of tenant on dispute whether landlord or tenant was responsible for repairing hailstorm damage to leased property, and remanding for further proceedings.
  • David v. Lubbock County, 25-11048, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Richman, Ramirez) (no oral argument), § 1983, timeliness
    • Affirming dismissal of plaintiff’s § 1983 claims as untimely filed.
  • U.S. v. Carrillo-Gonzalez, 25-20273, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (King, Haynes, Ho) (no oral argument), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming 58-month sentence on conviction of illegal reentry.
  • Venious v. Murrill, 25-30452, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Graves, Oldham) (no oral argument), § 1983
    • Affirming dismissal of claims challenging Louisiana’s sex-offender registration laws.
  • U.S. v. Smith, 25-30578, appeal from E.D. La.
    • per curiam (Richman, Southwick, Willett) (no oral argument), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming 18-month sentence on conviction of possession with the intent to distribute tapentadol and marijuana (though vacating in part and remanding to conform written judgment with orally pronounced sentence).
  • Talluri v. AIG Property Casualty Co., 24-30744, appeal from E.D. La.
    • per curiam (Barksdale, Willett, Duncan) (oral argument), insurance
    • Affirming judgment for insurer on jury verdict in claim for bad-faith damages for adjustment of hurricane-damage loss, upholding exclusion of appraisal-award amount and appraiser’s position regarding value of damage.
  • Crum v. Guerrero, 25-40153, appeal from E.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (King, Haynes, Ho) (no oral argument), habeas corpus
    • Affirming denial of habeas relief on petitioner’s IAC claim.
  • U.S. v. Hernandez-De la Cruz, 25-50494, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Graves, Oldham) (no oral argument), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.
  • Molina-Baires v. Bondi, 25-60183, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Stewart, Graves, Oldham) (no oral argument), immigration
    • Denying Salvadoran citizen’s petition for review of BIA order dismissing her appeal from an order of an Immigration Judge denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the CAT.
  • Price v. City of Natchez, 25-60206, appeal from S.D. Miss.
    • per curiam (Jones, Duncan, Douglas) (no oral argument), civil
    • Affirming judgment for defendant, with no description of claims or appellate issues.
  • Cherry v. Bisignano, 25-60243, appeal from S.D. Miss.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Graves, Oldham) (no oral argument), social security
    • Affirming denial of benefits.