Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Malish v. Austin Indep Sch Dis, 00-51285 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 00-51285 Visitors: 16
Filed: Apr. 10, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 00-51285 _ JEREMY MALISH; MARIA SOLIS, Parent of Erica Solis; JULIA A. PORFIRIO, Parent of Anne N. Porfirio, Plaintiffs-Appellees, versus AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; PASCAL D. FORGIONE, JR., Individually and in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellants. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (A-00-CV-701-JN) _ April 9, 2001 Before GARWOOD, HALL,1 and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURI
More
                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                        ____________________

                           No. 00-51285
                       ____________________

   JEREMY MALISH; MARIA SOLIS, Parent of Erica Solis; JULIA A.
              PORFIRIO, Parent of Anne N. Porfirio,

                                                 Plaintiffs-Appellees,

                                 versus

  AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; PASCAL D. FORGIONE, JR.,
           Individually and in his official capacity,

                                           Defendants-Appellants.
_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                 for the Western District of Texas
                          (A-00-CV-701-JN)
_________________________________________________________________

                              April 9, 2001

Before GARWOOD, HALL,1 and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:2

     The   district   court    having     concluded   that   the   Austin

Independent School District’s ranking policy at issue violated

Texas Education Code Annotated § 51.803(a) (granting automatic

admission to state undergraduate institutions to applicants who

“graduated with a grade point average in the top 10 percent of the

student’s high school graduating class”), and our having determined


     1
      Circuit Judge of the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation.
     2
      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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
that the district court did not abuse its discretion in reaching

that conclusion, the contested preliminary injunction is

                                                     AFFIRMED.




                                2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer