Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hamad v. H E B Food Stores, 19-30635 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 19-30635 Visitors: 2
Filed: Aug. 13, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-50880 Summary Calendar _ RIAD E. HAMAD, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus H E B FOOD STORES, Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-94-CV-649 _ August 1, 1996 Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Riad E. Hamad, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of H.E.B. Food Stores
More
                 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT


                         _____________________

                              No. 95-50880
                            Summary Calendar
                         _____________________



RIAD E. HAMAD,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellant,

                                versus

H E B FOOD STORES,

                                                 Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

      Appeal from the United States District Court for the
                    Western District of Texas
                       USDC No. A-94-CV-649
_________________________________________________________________
                          August 1, 1996
Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*



Riad E. Hamad, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals the

district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of H.E.B. Food

Stores ("HEB"), dismissing Hamad's claims under Title VII of the

Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the Age

discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq..     Hamad


     *
      Pursuant to Local Rule 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 Local Rule 47.5.4.
contends that HEB failed to promote him to its store management and

distribution management trainee programs because of Hamad's race,

national origin, and age.   Hamad also contends that HEB terminated

him prematurely in retaliation for his intention to complain about

the discriminatory treatment.

     After conducting a de novo review of the record and the

parties' briefs, we perceive no reversible error in the district

court's decision.   See Bodenheimer v. PPG Indus., 
5 F.3d 955
, 956

(5th Cir. 1993).     Accordingly, we AFFIRM for essentially the

reasons adopted by the district court.   Hamad v. H E B Food Stores,

No. A-94-CV-649 (W.D. Tex. Nov. 7, 1995).

                                                   A F F I R M E D.




                                -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