Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jeff Cox v. Full Service Auto Parts, Inc., 17-50456 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 17-50456 Visitors: 16
Filed: Dec. 14, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: Case: 17-50456 Document: 00514273716 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/14/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals No. 17-50456 Fifth Circuit FILED Summary Calendar December 14, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce JEFF W. COX, Clerk Plaintiff - Appellant v. FULL SERVICE AUTO PARTS, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:16-CV-678 Before REAVLEY, PRADO, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER
More
Case: 17-50456 Document: 00514273716 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/14/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals No. 17-50456 Fifth Circuit FILED Summary Calendar December 14, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce JEFF W. COX, Clerk Plaintiff - Appellant v. FULL SERVICE AUTO PARTS, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:16-CV-678 Before REAVLEY, PRADO, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The judgment of the district court is affirmed because the record will not support a claim for relief. The Plaintiff brought a lawsuit against the Defendant in 2013, claiming discrimination of age and disability and because of retaliation for exercising his rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act, * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Case: 17-50456 Document: 00514273716 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/14/2017 No. 17-50456 he suffered a demotion in employment without receiving reasonable accommodation. Plaintiff testified that he had suffered a heart attack in 2012 and admitted that he had been completely unable to work and would never be able to work in any capacity. Summary Judgment was entered against Plaintiff on July 9, 2015. Plaintiff did not appeal but this new lawsuit was filed the following year alleging the very same legal claims. His distinction is that the first claim was about a demotion and now it is about his removal from employment rolls by Defendant in 2015. With his own testimony and the claims rejected by the prior judgment, he has no legal claim standing. 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