Court Opinion

ID: 26299
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 08:50:49+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:38:18.511676
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                        _______________________

                             No. 01-40070
                       Civil Docket #2:99-CV-233
                        _______________________

MERLIN PORE, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of
Weylin Pore, WANDA PORE, Individually and as Representative of the
Estate of Weylin Pore,

                                                  Plaintiffs-Appellants,

                                  versus

GREGORY A. BARKSDALE; ET AL,

                                                               Defendants,

                          GREGORY A. BARKSDALE,

                                                      Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                 for the Eastern District of Texas
_________________________________________________________________

                        December 13, 2001
Before JONES, EMILIO M. GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.*

PER CURIAM:

           The court has carefully considered this appeal in light

of the briefs, oral argument and pertinent portions of the record.

Having done so, we find no reversible error of fact or law in the

     *
            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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.
district court’s judgment and its choice of law determination.

Notwithstanding the able arguments of appellants’ counsel, the

district court did not err in concluding that Kansas had the most

significant relationship to this case, it was the place of the

accident, the residence of the victim, a principal place of the

individual defendant’s employment, and the place of injury and

neither Texas nor Virginia had a more significant relationship to

the litigation.

          AFFIRMED.

                                2