Vach v. Ctrl Power & Light, 95-40066 (1995)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Number: 95-40066
Visitors: 13
Filed: Nov. 08, 1995
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-40066 MARY KAY VACH, Plaintiff-Appellee Cross-Appellant, versus CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant Cross-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Southern District of Texas (C:93-CV-105) November 13, 1995 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* We agree with the district judge that the actions of defendant claimed to be illegal either occurred before
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-40066 MARY KAY VACH, Plaintiff-Appellee Cross-Appellant, versus CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant Cross-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Southern District of Texas (C:93-CV-105) November 13, 1995 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* We agree with the district judge that the actions of defendant claimed to be illegal either occurred before ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-40066 MARY KAY VACH, Plaintiff-Appellee Cross-Appellant, versus CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant Cross-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Southern District of Texas (C:93-CV-105) November 13, 1995 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* We agree with the district judge that the actions of defendant claimed to be illegal either occurred before July 26, 1992, the effective date of the ADA, or were not supported by record evidence. AFFIRMED. * Local rule 47.5 provides: “The publication of opinions that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession.” Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published.
Source: CourtListener
