Hershey v. City of Bossier City | Docket

Hershey v. City of Bossier City

The Fifth Circuit considered panel rehearing in Richard Hershey’s appeal involving qualified-immunity issues. The per curiam court denied rehearing; Judge Ho dissented, stating that rehearing should have allowed Hershey to brief the qualified-immunity issues referenced in an earlier en banc dissent, while recognizing that dissents have no legal force.

Docket

Court

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Court level

appellate

Jurisdiction

Federal

Date filed

January 13, 2026

Parties

Richard Hershey · appellantCity of Bossier City · appelleeDavid Smith · appelleeDaniel Stoll · appelleeEugene Tucker · appelleeBobby Gilbert · appelleeTyshon Harvey · appellee

Judges

DennisRichman · majorityHo · dissent, author

Status

published

Disposition

Panel rehearing DENIED.

Opinion type

combined

Format

per curiam

Nature of suit

Other Civil Rights

Date argued

December 7, 2022

Source

View PDF

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-30754

Richard Hershey, Plaintiff—Appellant , versus City of Bossier City; Bobby Gilbert, Individually and in his Capacity as Deputy Marshal ; Daniel Stoll; David Smith; Tyshon Harvey; Eugene Tucker, Defendants—Appellees .

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:21-CV-460

PUBLISHED ORDER

Before Dennis, Richman, and Ho, Circuit Judges . * Per Curiam:

IT IS ORDERED that panel rehearing is DENIED . See Fed. R. App . 40(a); 5th Cir. R. 40 I.O.P.

Page 2James C. Ho , Circuit Judge , dissenting:

I would have granted panel rehearing, and taken the en banc dissental at its word, regarding its sudden and profoundly surprising change of heart on qualified immunity. Panel rehearing would have given Richard Hershey the opportunity to brief the qualified immunity issues that the dissental purportedly welcomed him to present. But I’m now reminded that “dissents . . . carry no legal force.” Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc. , 590 U.S. 255, 273 (2020). So whatever assurances Hershey thought he was getting, it turns out that 'comments in a dissenting opinion about legal principles and precedents are just that: comments in a dissenting opinion.” Id. (cleaned up). I regret that things have come to this. The judiciary possesses neither the sword nor the purse. All we have is our word.

Footnotes

* Judge Dennis did not participate in this decision.