The following published opinions were released by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on July 8, 2008:

• Aryain v. Wal-Mart Stores Texas LP (Reavley, Jolly, Garza, JJ.; opinion by Garza, J.). Affirming in part, reversing in part, and vacating in part summary judgment in favor of defendant Wal-Mart on plaintiff’s claims of sexual harassment, constructive discharge, and retaliation. The Fifth Circuit found that genuine issues of material fact existed as to the plaintiff’s sexual harassment claims, but that the plaintiff could not make out a claim of constructive discharge to trigger Title VII strict vicarious liability. The Court then held that genuine issues of fact remained as to the applicability of the Ellerth/Faragher affirmative defense to the sexual harassment claim, such that summary judgment was not appropriate on that claim. The Court then held that the plaintiff had not made a prima facie showing on her retaliation claim.
• In the Matter of Hilal (Jones, C.J., Barksdale, Stewart, JJ.; opinion by Jones, C.J.). Vacating the dismissal of the debtor’s appeal of the Chapter 11 Plan by the district court, and affirming the confirmation order on the merits. The Fifth Circuit held that the appeal was not equitably mooted by the substantial consummation of the plan because third parties would not be adversely affected. Nevertheless, the Fifth Circuit held that the debtor’s challenge bordered on frivolous, and affirmed the confirmation order.
• Health Net, Inc. v. Wooley (Reavley, Smith, Dennis, JJ.; opinion by Smith, J.). Plaintiff had lost a suit brought against it in state court, and brought this suit in federal court to block enforcement of the state court judgment on the basis of improper ex parte communications between the state court plaintiff (defendant here) and the state trial court judge. The federal district court dismissed Health Net’s suit and imposed sanctions on Health Net’s attorneys, Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere, and Denegre. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Health Net’s claim, but vacated the sanctions against Jones Walker. The Fifth Circuit held that dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction was appropriate because Younger abstention dictated that the district court not exercise its jurisdiction. The Fifth Circuit then held that Rule 11 sanctions were an abuse of discretion because the district court relied on an erroneous view of the law to sanction Jones Walker.