Filed: Jan. 10, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 00-20341 _ GARY PEAK, MIKE KIMBRO; JACQUELINE COGLEY, OSCAR FAVELLA Plaintiffs-Appellants v. VARTEC TELECOM, INC Defendant-Appellee - _ No. 00-20409 _ GARY PEAK, MIKE KIMBRO; JACQUELINE COGLEY, OSCAR FAVELLA Plaintiffs-Appellees v. VARTEC TELECOM, INC Defendant-Appellant _ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston _ January 10, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and DUHÉ
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 00-20341 _ GARY PEAK, MIKE KIMBRO; JACQUELINE COGLEY, OSCAR FAVELLA Plaintiffs-Appellants v. VARTEC TELECOM, INC Defendant-Appellee - _ No. 00-20409 _ GARY PEAK, MIKE KIMBRO; JACQUELINE COGLEY, OSCAR FAVELLA Plaintiffs-Appellees v. VARTEC TELECOM, INC Defendant-Appellant _ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston _ January 10, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and DUHÉ,..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _____________________ No. 00-20341 _____________________ GARY PEAK, MIKE KIMBRO; JACQUELINE COGLEY, OSCAR FAVELLA Plaintiffs-Appellants v. VARTEC TELECOM, INC Defendant-Appellee ---------------------------------- _____________________ No. 00-20409 _____________________ GARY PEAK, MIKE KIMBRO; JACQUELINE COGLEY, OSCAR FAVELLA Plaintiffs-Appellees v. VARTEC TELECOM, INC Defendant-Appellant _________________________________________________________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston _________________________________________________________________ January 10, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of defendant-appellee Vartec Telecom, Inc., nor did the district court abuse its discretion in refusing to award attorney’s fees to Vartec. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 2
