Filed: Nov. 15, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ m 99-11106 _ THEDRO DIGGLES AND DEBRA ANDERSON, Plaintiffs-Appellants, VERSUS BOEING DEFENSE & SPACESSIRVING CO., Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (3:97-CV-2524-R) _ November 14, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, heard and considered the oral arguments of Circuit Judges. counsel, we conclude that the district court committed no reversible error. PER CURIAM:* Irre
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ m 99-11106 _ THEDRO DIGGLES AND DEBRA ANDERSON, Plaintiffs-Appellants, VERSUS BOEING DEFENSE & SPACESSIRVING CO., Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (3:97-CV-2524-R) _ November 14, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, heard and considered the oral arguments of Circuit Judges. counsel, we conclude that the district court committed no reversible error. PER CURIAM:* Irres..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _______________ m 99-11106 _______________ THEDRO DIGGLES AND DEBRA ANDERSON, Plaintiffs-Appellants, VERSUS BOEING DEFENSE & SPACESSIRVING CO., Defendant-Appellee. _________________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (3:97-CV-2524-R) _________________________ November 14, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, heard and considered the oral arguments of Circuit Judges. counsel, we conclude that the district court committed no reversible error. PER CURIAM:* Irrespective of whether the court was cor- The plaintiffs appeal only the award of at- rect in assigning its reasons for the assessment torneys’ fees. Having reviewed the briefs, the of fees, it is not reasonably deniable that the record, and the applicable law, and having plaintiff-appellants were guilty of gross misconduct and were subject to sanction on that ground at least. The judgment, ** * accordingly, is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. ** R. 47.5.4. Judge Jolly would reverse as to Anderson.
