Case ID: f-appx_451/html/0466-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, L.L.C., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. WACKENHUT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-30119.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Nov. 30, 2011.
    Cory R. Cahn, Esq., Senior Counsel, Marcus Van Brown, Esq., Entergy Services, Inc., New Orleans, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Elizabeth Haecker Ryan, Mandie Elizabeth Landry, Esq., Lemle & Kelleher, L.L.P., New Orleans, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before SMITH, PRADO, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Entergy Louisiana, L.L.C. (“Entergy”), sued Wackenhut Corporation (“Wacken-hut”) for a declaratory judgment that En-tergy was not required to indemnify Wack-enhut for sums paid to settle a wage-and-hours dispute with the guards it employed to secure Entergy’s power plant. The district court granted summary judgment to Entergy based on the contract and denied recovery under a theory of quantum me-ruit.

We have reviewed the briefs, the applicable law, and pertinent portions of the record and have heard the arguments of counsel. Essentially on the basis of the Order and Reasons entered by the district court to explain the summary judgment, that judgment is AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.