Case Name: Teresa BENNETT, Plaintiff-Appellant v. CITY OF DALLAS, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-11-11
Citations: 450 F. App'x 351
Docket Number: No. 10-11064
Parties: Teresa BENNETT, Plaintiff-Appellant v. CITY OF DALLAS, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 450
Pages: 351–351

Head Matter:
Teresa BENNETT, Plaintiff-Appellant v. CITY OF DALLAS, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 10-11064
Summary Calender.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Nov. 11, 2011.
Kenneth D. Carden, Carden Law Office, Dallas, TX, Palmer D. Bailey, Esq., Law Office of Palmer Bailey, Addison, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Barbara Elaine Rosenberg, Esq., Christopher John Caso, Esq., Assistant City Attorney, City Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The district court granted a motion to dismiss based on our opinion that was subsequently vacated by this court sitting en banc. We VACATE and REMAND for reconsideration.
In concluding that the plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, the district court relied on our opinion in Frame v. City of Arlington, 616 F.3d 476 (5th Cir.2010). After the district court entered judgment, that opinion was vacated as a result of the grant of a petition for rehearing en banc. Frame v. City of Arlington, 632 F.3d 177 (5th Cir.2011). The court sitting en banc reached conclusions that were contrary to those in the 2010 panel opinion on which the district court relied. Frame v. City of Arlington, 657 F.3d 215 (5th Cir.2011) (en banc).
We remand to permit the district court to reconsider its ruling on the defendant's motion to dismiss in light of our en banc opinion in Frame.
VACATED and REMANDED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.