Court Opinion

ID: 43798
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 22:00:48+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:37:57.969267
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                                                                       Fifth Circuit
                                                                    F I L E D
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                        July 12, 2006

                        _______________________                 Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                        Clerk
                              No. 05-21019
                            Summary Calendar
                        _______________________

                              GENANA HOLLY,

                                                     Plaintiff-Appellant,
                                  versus

                        MARICOPA COUNTY; ET AL.,
                                                                 Defendants,

                         WAL-MART STORES, INC.,

                                                      Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

         On Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Southern District of Texas
                         No. 4:04-CV-1980
________________________________________________________________

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

           This court, having carefully reviewed the parties’ briefs

and pertinent     portions   of   the   record,   concludes    there     is   no

reversible error in the district court’s findings of fact and

conclusions of law.     We therefore AFFIRM the final judgment of the

district court essentially for the reasons stated in its opinion.

                                                                    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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.