Filed: Apr. 24, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-20755 Summary Calendar _ ANTHONY ROBINSON, CHAQUITHA NELSON and CHARLOTTE HUNTER, Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT; HENRY G. CISNEROS, Secretary, in his capacity as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Defendants. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas CA-H-93-3256 & CA-H-93-3228
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-20755 Summary Calendar _ ANTHONY ROBINSON, CHAQUITHA NELSON and CHARLOTTE HUNTER, Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT; HENRY G. CISNEROS, Secretary, in his capacity as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Defendants. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas CA-H-93-3256 & CA-H-93-3228 ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _____________________ No. 95-20755 Summary Calendar _____________________ ANTHONY ROBINSON, CHAQUITHA NELSON and CHARLOTTE HUNTER, Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT; HENRY G. CISNEROS, Secretary, in his capacity as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Defendants. _______________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas CA-H-93-3256 & CA-H-93-3228 _______________________________________________________ May 6, 1996 Before REAVLEY, SMITH and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Upon review of the briefs of the parties, the record, and the district court’s opinion, we AFFIRM for the reasons given by the district court in his Order of Dismissal entered April 24, 1995. AFFIRMED. * Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.
