Mayes v. Galveston County

── Mayes v. Galveston County ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Date: May 26, 2026 Category: Civil Rights Case: 25-40307 Document: 87-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/26/2026 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 25-40307 May 26, 2026 ____________ Lyle W. Cayce Alfy Mayes, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Galveston County, Defendant—Appellee. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 3:24-CV-15 ______________________________ Before Elrod, Chief Judge, and Ho and Ramirez, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Appellant Alfy Mayes worked as a jailor for the Galveston County Sheriff’s Office from 2009 until 2024. In 2021, Mayes filed his first federal lawsuit against Galveston County, alleging race discrimination, disability discrimination, and retaliation. The district court granted summary judgment to the County on all claims, and Mayes did not appeal. Mayes then filed a second federal lawsuit—the subject of this appeal—alleging that the _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.  Case: 25-40307 Document: 87-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/26/2026 No. 25-40307 County retaliated against him on three separate occasions for filing the first lawsuit. 1 The County’s first allegedly retaliatory action was its suspension of Mayes for one day without pay. The County ordered this disciplinary measure after Mayes delayed calling for emergency assistance while working in the suicide prevention unit despite observing an inmate wrapping cloth around his neck. The second allegedly retaliatory action was the County’s suspension of Mayes for five days without pay after Mayes delayed assisting a fellow officer in subduing an insubordinate inmate. The County’s third allegedly retaliatory action was its recommendation that Mayes be terminated after he kicked an inmate and struck him in the face multiple times. The district court granted summary judgment to the County, holding that it had “conclusively prove[n]” that all three disciplinary actions were made for “legitimate, nondiscriminatory or nonretaliatory reasons.” Mayes now appeals. For the following reasons, we affirm. “We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, viewing all evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and drawing all reasonable inferences in that party’s favor.” Pierce v. Dep’t of U.S. Air Force, 512 F.3d 184, 186 (5th Cir. 2007). “[S]ummary judgment is appropriate when the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Dupree v. Younger, 598 U.S. 729, 737 (2023) (cleaned up); Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). Mayes’s sole contention on appeal is that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to the County because he raised genuine _____________________ 1 Mayes also brought a disparate-treatment claim which he later voluntarily dismissed. 2 Case: 25-40307 Document: 87-1 Page: 3 Date Fi