Court Opinion

ID: 9554196
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-08 00:00:32.066732+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:23:20.406825
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50001        Document: 00516848250             Page: 1      Date Filed: 08/07/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 23-50001
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                                 August 7, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   Kevin McBride,                                                                     Clerk

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                            versus

   Half Price Books, Records, Magazines, Incorporated,

                                               Defendant—Appellee.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 1:22-CV-703
                     ______________________________

   Before Willett, Duncan, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Kevin McBride filed a pro se civil suit in which he alleged a claim of
   race-based discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. After the matter was
   removed from state court to the district court, the defendant moved to
   dismiss the suit for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil
   Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court granted the motion. McBride appeals
   that dismissal. We review the grant of a motion to dismiss under Rule
         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50001      Document: 00516848250           Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/07/2023

                                     No. 23-50001

   12(b)(6) de novo. Romero v. City of Grapevine, Texas, 888 F.3d 170, 176 (5th
   Cir. 2018).
          To sustain a claim under § 1981, McBride must establish that: (1) he
   is a member of a racial minority; (2) the defendant intended to discriminate
   on the basis of race; and (3) the discrimination concerned one or more of the
   actions listed in the statute, e.g., the making and enforcing of a contract. See
   Morris v. Dillard Dep’s Stores, Inc., 277 F.3d 743, 751 (5th Cir. 2001). He must
   prove the loss of an actual contract interest and not one that is speculative or
   prospective. See id. at 751-52.
          McBride failed to plead sufficient facts to support that the defendant
   thwarted a tangible attempt to contract. See Arguello v. Conoco, Inc., 330 F.3d
   355, 358-59 (5th Cir. 2003); Morris, 277 F.3d at 752. He conceded that he
   arrived at the store outside of its normal business hours, knew that the store
   was closed, and decided to try to enter the store anyway to purchase an item.
   A store employee told McBride what he knew or suspected, i.e., the store was
   closed and that he could return the following day when the store was open.
   Because the store was closed, no transaction was proposed or possible under
   the circumstances; therefore, no actual contractual relationship existed when
   McBride was denied entry, and the defendant did not interfere with a tangible
   attempt to buy a specific item. See Arguello, 330 F.3d at 358-59; Morris, 277
   F.3d at 752. While McBride alleged that a white woman was allowed to enter
   the store after he was denied entry and left with a bag in her hand, he did not
   present facts supporting that the store was open to the woman to initiate and
   complete a purchase but was not open to him for the same purpose. See Body
   by Cook, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 869 F.3d 381, 386 (5th Cir. 2017)
   (noting that an allegation that a similarly situated non-minority was provided
   better treatment could support a § 1981 claim).

                                          2
Case: 23-50001     Document: 00516848250           Page: 3   Date Filed: 08/07/2023

                                    No. 23-50001

          Thus, the judgment is AFFIRMED.               McBride’s motion for
   appointment of appellate counsel is DENIED because he has not
   demonstrated that this case presents exceptional circumstances. See Cooper
   v. Sheriff, Lubbock Cty., 929 F.2d 1078, 1084 (5th Cir. 1991).

                                         3