Filed: Jun. 05, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-60714 Summary Calendar _ ROBERT T. DELUCA, Plaintiff-Cross-Claimant-Appellant, versus DELCHAMPS, Inc.; SELCAST, S.A., Inc.; STEIN MART, Inc., Defendants-Appellees, AUTOMATIC DOOR SYSTEMS, Inc., Cross-Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi District Court Number 1:97-CV-498-RG _ June 1, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.* PER CURIAM: The court has
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-60714 Summary Calendar _ ROBERT T. DELUCA, Plaintiff-Cross-Claimant-Appellant, versus DELCHAMPS, Inc.; SELCAST, S.A., Inc.; STEIN MART, Inc., Defendants-Appellees, AUTOMATIC DOOR SYSTEMS, Inc., Cross-Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi District Court Number 1:97-CV-498-RG _ June 1, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.* PER CURIAM: The court has ..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _______________________ No. 99-60714 Summary Calendar _______________________ ROBERT T. DELUCA, Plaintiff-Cross-Claimant-Appellant, versus DELCHAMPS, Inc.; SELCAST, S.A., Inc.; STEIN MART, Inc., Defendants-Appellees, AUTOMATIC DOOR SYSTEMS, Inc., Cross-Defendant-Appellee. _________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi District Court Number 1:97-CV-498-RG _________________________________________________________________ June 1, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.* PER CURIAM: The court has considered appellant’s position in light of the briefs and pertinent portions of the record. Having done so, * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. we find no reversible error of fact or law and affirm for essentially the reasons stated by the district court. AFFIRMED.
