Opinion ID: 3151823
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, applying the same standard as the district court. Cuadra v. Hous. Indep. Sch. Dist., 626 F.3d 808, 812 (5th Cir. 2010). Summary judgment is proper “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The court views the evidence “in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.” Cuadra, 626 F.3d at 812. “We may affirm a summary judgment on any ground supported by the record, even if it is different from that relied on by the district court.” Pierce v. Dep’t of U.S. Air Force, 512 F.3d 184, 186 (5th Cir. 2007) (quoting Lozano v. Ocwen Fed. Bank, FSB, 489 F.3d 636, 641 (5th Cir. 2007)). 18 The exact nature of the resolution is unclear. 19 The 2011–2012 school year was Kyana’s senior year, and she graduated from Marion High School after the 2012 spring semester. 20 The Second Amended Complaint also alleged an equal protection claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Coach Smith, but the district court dismissed that claim with prejudice for failing to state a claim. 11 Case: 14-51098 Document: 00513257817 Page: 12 Date Filed: 11/03/2015 No. 14-51098