Filed: Nov. 11, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 01-31343 _ THE SCHOOL BOARD OF THE PARISH OF ST. CHARLES, on its own behalf & as collecting agent for; THE ST. CHARLES PARISH COUNCIL, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus QUALA SYSTEMS INC., doing business as Quala Wash, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Eastern District of Louisiana No. 00-CV-2894-K November 11, 2002 Before EMILIO M. GARZA and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges, and HUDSPETH*, District Judge. PER CURIA
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 01-31343 _ THE SCHOOL BOARD OF THE PARISH OF ST. CHARLES, on its own behalf & as collecting agent for; THE ST. CHARLES PARISH COUNCIL, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus QUALA SYSTEMS INC., doing business as Quala Wash, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Eastern District of Louisiana No. 00-CV-2894-K November 11, 2002 Before EMILIO M. GARZA and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges, and HUDSPETH*, District Judge. PER CURIAM..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
____________
No. 01-31343
____________
THE SCHOOL BOARD OF THE PARISH OF ST. CHARLES, on
its own behalf & as collecting agent for; THE ST. CHARLES
PARISH COUNCIL,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
QUALA SYSTEMS INC., doing business as Quala Wash,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Eastern District of Louisiana
No. 00-CV-2894-K
November 11, 2002
Before EMILIO M. GARZA and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges, and HUDSPETH*, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:**
Because the plaintiffs have waived t heir claim for sales taxes due resulting from the
defendant’s sale of gaskets, the judgment of the district court is final and we therefore have appellate
*
District Judge of the Western District of Texas, sitting by designation.
**
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
jurisdiction. See Clark v. Johnson,
278 F.3d 459, 460 (5th Cir. 2002) (“In general, a district court's
order is an appealable final decision if it ‘ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the
court to do but execute the judgment.’”) (quoting Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay,
437 U.S. 463, 467
(1978)).
We AFFIRM essentially for the reasons given by the district court.
-2-