Case ID: f2d_446/html/0882-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Luz Acosta DIAZ et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Carlos SUBIA et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 71-1471
    Summary Calendar.
    
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    July 16, 1971.
    Rehearing Denied Aug. 6, 1971.
    Mark F. Howell, J. B. Ochoa, Jr.; Clarence Moyers, Albert Armendariz, Frank T. Ivy, Edward F. Sherman, El Paso, Tex., for plaintiffs-appellants.
    John B. Luscombe, Jr., Travis White, City Atty., John C. Ross, Jr., Wade Adkins, Asst. City Attys., El Paso, Tex., for defendants-appellees; Peticolas, Lus-combe, Stephens & Windle, El Paso, Tex., of counsel.
    Before BELL, AINSWORTH and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       Rule 18, 5 Cir., Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Company of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.
    
   PER CURIAM:

The order of the District Court dismissing plaintiffs’ third amended complaint is affirmed. We agree with the District Court that plaintiffs failed to set out “a short and plain statement of the claim” as required by Rule 8(a), Fed. R.Civ.P. We do not reach other grounds asserted as basis for the dismissal which is, of course, without prejudice.

Affirmed.