Court Opinion

ID: 34609
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 19:18:18+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:56.094352
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                             F I L E D
              IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS           March 8, 2004

                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT           Charles R. Fulbruge III
                         _____________________                   Clerk

                              No. 03-50323
                         _____________________

GINGER RICHARDSON NOVELLI,

       Plaintiff - Counter Defendant - Appellant- Cross-Appellee,

WILLIAM L. RICHARDSON,

                                         Plaintiff - Cross-Appellee,

                                versus

JOSEPH PASCHALL, Etc.; ET AL.,

                                                         Defendants,

JOSEPH PASCHALL, doing business
as Paschall Skipper & Associates,
Individually and d/b/a Paschall Skipper &
Associates; PASCHALL SKIPPER & ASSOCIATES,

                                             Defendants - Appellees,

PATRICK M. ARNOLD,

        Defendant- Counter Plaintiff -Appellee - Cross-Appellant,

WATSON C. ARNOLD JR.,

                  Counter Plaintiff - Appellee - Cross-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                 for the Western District of Texas
                        USDC No. W-02-CV-47
_________________________________________________________________

Before JOLLY, DUHÉ, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*

     We have reviewed the record, studied the briefs and heard

arguments of counsel.       We are now thoroughly convinced that the

judgment of the district court, granting summary judgment for the

defendants     and   dismissing   the       complaint,   is   free   of   error.

Consequently, its judgment is

                                                                     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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.

                                        2