Hershey v. City of Bossier City

Opinion

Case: 21-30754 Document: 118-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/13/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

____________ FILED January 13, 2026 No. 21-30754 Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

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.

_____________________ * Judge Dennis did not participate in this decision. Case: 21-30754 Document: 118-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/13/2026

No. 21-30754

James 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.