CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. W-96-CA-139, et al.
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 28, 1999

Andrade v. Chojnacki

This case addresses claims stemming from the 1993 Waco siege, brought by Branch Davidian survivors and family members against the United States, various federal officials (ATF, FBI), and former Texas Governor Ann Richards. Plaintiffs asserted violations under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), Bivens, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1988, 1985(3), RICO, and Texas state law. The Court granted most of the defendants' motions, dismissing claims under §§ 1983, 1985(3), RICO, and Texas constitutional law. Many Bivens claims against individual defendants were dismissed due to qualified immunity or lack of specific allegations. Some FTCA claims were dismissed for procedural failures or under the discretionary function exception, and bystander liability was rejected. Remaining for trial are specific FTCA claims against the United States concerning excessive force during the initial raid, excessive force by the FBI during tear gas insertion and the fire, and FBI negligence related to the fire and its extinguishment. FBI Agent Lon Horiuchi remains an individual defendant for certain Bivens claims.

Waco siegeBranch DavidiansFederal Tort Claims ActBivens actionQualified ImmunityExcessive ForceFourth AmendmentFifth AmendmentDue ProcessRICO
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hetzler v. Record/Information Dissemination Section, Federal Bureau of Investigation

This case involves a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by pro se plaintiff Déirdre McKiernan Hetzler seeking records from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) concerning her father. The FBI released some documents, redacted others, and withheld some entirely, citing various FOIA exemptions including national security, internal agency rules, and protection of confidential sources and third-party privacy. Plaintiff challenged the breadth of these redactions. The Court conducted an in camera review of the withheld documents and, after evaluating the asserted exemptions, granted in part and denied in part both the defendants' motion for summary judgment and the plaintiff's cross-motion, ordering the FBI to re-process and re-release certain documents where redactions were deemed unjustified.

FOIANational SecurityClassified InformationRedactionSummary JudgmentPrivacy InterestsConfidential SourcesFBIGovernment RecordsDeclassified Documents
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New Alliance Party v. Federal Bureau of Investigation

Plaintiff New Alliance Party (NAP) sued the FBI, alleging that the FBI characterized NAP as a “political cult” and investigated it, thereby chilling their First Amendment rights. NAP contended the investigation, initiated in 1988 based on uncorroborated allegations, and a later inquiry in 1991, harmed the party's public image and political competitiveness. The defendants moved to dismiss, arguing lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, which the court converted to a motion for summary judgment. The court found NAP lacked constitutional standing, failing to demonstrate actual or threatened injury directly traceable to the FBI's actions, noting NAP members continued significant political activities. Ultimately, the court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint.

First AmendmentFreedom of SpeechFreedom of AssociationPolitical PartyFBI InvestigationConstitutional StandingSummary JudgmentDeclaratory JudgmentSovereign ImmunityFreedom of Information Act
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 07, 1978

SOCIALIST WKRS. PARTY v. Attorney General of US

This case involves an action by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and the Young Socialist Alliance (YSA) against various federal agencies and officials, primarily the Attorney General and the FBI, for alleged constitutional violations stemming from extensive FBI informant activities and disruption programs. The current opinion addresses the Attorney General's refusal to comply with a May 31, 1977, court order to produce 18 confidential FBI informant files to plaintiffs' counsel. The court rejected the Attorney General's arguments concerning informant confidentiality, appellate review, and alternative sanctions, emphasizing the files' indispensable nature for the litigation of plaintiffs' claims, which include demands for damages and injunctive relief. The court ruled that the Attorney General must comply with the production order by July 7, 1978, or face civil contempt, underscoring the judiciary's power to enforce orders even against high-ranking government officials.

Informant ConfidentialityDiscovery DisputeCivil ContemptGovernment MisconductFBI SurveillancePolitical OrganizationsFirst Amendment RightsConstitutional ViolationsAppellate ReviewAttorney General
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 30, 1988

Perez v. Federal Bureau of Investigation

The case involves a class action lawsuit filed by 310 Hispanic Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), led by named plaintiff Bernardo Perez, alleging national origin discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court found a pattern and practice of discrimination within the FBI concerning conditions of employment and promotional opportunities for Hispanic agents. Specifically, the court highlighted the disproportionate burden placed on Hispanic agents for Spanish language-related assignments (like wiretaps and undercover work), which adversely affected their career advancement. The promotional system, with its excessive subjective elements and lack of EEO compliance mechanisms, was deemed discriminatory. The court also found that the FBI retaliated against Bernardo Perez for filing an EEO complaint, including the misuse of a Grand Jury subpoena during an administrative investigation against him. However, claims of religious discrimination and class-wide administrative discipline and transfer discrimination were not substantiated.

National Origin DiscriminationEmployment DiscriminationCivil Rights ActDisparate TreatmentDisparate ImpactRetaliationFBIClass ActionPromotional SystemSubjective Evaluations
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Socialist Workers Party v. Attorney General of the United States

Plaintiffs, the Young Socialist Alliance (YSA) and Socialist Workers Party (SWP), sought a preliminary injunction to prevent the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from conducting surveillance at the YSA's national convention. The organizations argued that the FBI's intended surveillance, which included recording identities and sharing information for government employment screening, created a substantial chilling effect on their First Amendment rights of free speech and association. The court, presided over by Judge Griesa, found that the proposed surveillance would significantly impair these rights. Despite the government's contention, the court concluded that the plaintiffs' revolutionary rhetoric was theoretical and their record demonstrated non-violence, thus no compelling government interest justified the surveillance. Consequently, the motion for a preliminary injunction was granted.

First Amendment RightsFreedom of AssociationFreedom of SpeechFBI SurveillancePreliminary InjunctionPolitical OrganizationsSocialist Workers PartyYoung Socialist AllianceGovernment OverreachChilling Effect
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Center for Constitutional Rights v. Department of Defense

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) initiated this Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Defense (DOD), FBI, and CIA, seeking the release of images and videos of detainee Mohammed al-Qahtani from Guantánamo Bay. While the DOD and FBI acknowledged possessing such records but withheld them, the CIA issued a Glomar response, neither confirming nor denying their existence. The Court ultimately denied CCR's motion for partial summary judgment and granted the Government's cross-motion for summary judgment. The decision cited national security concerns, including potential harm to military personnel, extremist recruitment, compromised intelligence efforts, and adverse impacts on international relations, as valid reasons for withholding the records and for the CIA's Glomar response under FOIA Exemption 1.

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)National SecurityClassified InformationGuantánamo BayDetaineeMohammed al-QahtaniSummary JudgmentFOIA ExemptionsGlomar ResponseIntelligence Collection
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Yudong Zhu

Defendant Yudong Zhu, indicted on various fraud and bribery charges, moved to suppress evidence seized from his encrypted work laptop, alleging a Fourth Amendment violation. Zhu, an assistant professor at NYU, purchased the laptop with NIH grant funds and used it for both personal and professional tasks. During an NYU investigation, Zhu surrendered the laptop but withheld passwords, leading NYU to provide it to the FBI. The FBI conducted a warrantless search based on NYU's consent. The Court acknowledged Zhu's reasonable expectation of privacy due to his security measures and exclusive use. However, it ultimately denied his motion, ruling that NYU's consent was valid because of Zhu's signed authorization allowing NYU to inspect its computers for policy compliance, and NYU's common authority and substantial interest as the laptop's owner.

Fourth AmendmentExpectation of PrivacyWarrantless SearchThird-Party ConsentEmployer PolicyLaptop SearchCriminal ProcedureSuppression MotionElectronic EvidenceNIH Grant
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 22, 2001

United States v. Reyes

Defendant Christopher Reyes sought a judgment of acquittal after a jury convicted him of conspiracy to transport stolen airbags in interstate commerce. The District Court, reserving judgment on the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29 motion, reviewed the government's evidence to determine if Reyes' knowing and willful participation in the conspiracy was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence included testimony from a co-conspirator's employee, recorded phone calls, and an FBI agent's account of post-arrest interrogations. The Court found the evidence insufficient to establish Reyes' specific intent, citing the ambiguity of his statements and the unreliability of the FBI agent's testimony due to inconsistencies and volunteered opinions. Consequently, the defendant's motion for a judgment of acquittal was granted, and the court also commented on proper grand jury procedures and witness testimony.

Criminal LawConspiracyStolen PropertyJudgment of AcquittalRule 29 MotionSufficiency of EvidenceWitness CredibilityFBI TestimonyHearsayGrand Jury Proceedings
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Socialist Workers Party v. Attorney General of United States

This case centers on an action brought by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and its youth arm, the Young Socialist Alliance (YSA), against the United States and various government officials. The plaintiffs alleged pervasive illegal activities by the FBI and other federal agencies, including systematic harassment, infiltration, disruption, and surveillance. The court found that the FBI engaged in unconstitutional disruption activities and surreptitious entries, and improperly used informants to gather private information on lawful political activities. As a result, the SWP and YSA were awarded $264,000 in damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act. However, claims for electronic surveillance damages and damages sought by individual plaintiffs were dismissed, and most requests for broad declaratory and injunctive relief were denied, except for an injunction ordering the segregation and limited dissemination of illegally obtained government documents.

FBI MisconductGovernment SurveillancePolitical OrganizationsFirst Amendment RightsCivil Rights LitigationFederal Tort Claims ActInfiltrationDisruption ProgramsSurreptitious EntriesInformants
References
141
Showing 1-10 of 21 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational