Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Everett Watson v. Fluor Daniels, Incorporated, 12-50730 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 12-50730 Visitors: 59
Filed: Feb. 25, 2013
Latest Update: Feb. 12, 2020
Summary: Case: 12-50730 Document: 00512154189 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED February 25, 2013 No. 12-50730 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk EVERETT WATSON, Plaintiff-Appellant v. FLUOR DANIELS, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:11-CV-217 Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The
More
Case: 12-50730 Document: 00512154189 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED February 25, 2013 No. 12-50730 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk EVERETT WATSON, Plaintiff-Appellant v. FLUOR DANIELS, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:11-CV-217 Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The judgment of the district court is affirmed. Mr. Watson is apparently a skilled electrician who suffers from a heart condition that disqualified him from intended employment with Fluor Daniels, Inc. He brought this lawsuit seeking damages for his misfortune. The magistrate judge has explained by order dated March 1, 2012, why the lawsuit * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Case: 12-50730 Document: 00512154189 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 No. 12-50730 lacks legal merit, and the district judge has adopted that report and dismissed the case. Mr. Watson’s problem is that he has only his statements and views of the law to support his claims. There is no evidence of an actual employment contract or breach as required by the law and no legal support for the other claims. The magistrate judge’s reasons should be accepted by him, and this court must affirm the judgment. AFFIRMED. 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