Halkias v. General Dynamics

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Halkias v. General Dynamics. Read the opinion of the Court — 101 F.3d 698
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided November 5, 1996·No. 95-11065·Unpublished

Opinion

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-11065

JOHN HALKIAS, ET AL.,

Plaintiff,

JOHN HALKIAS,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant.

----------------------------------

JAMES ANTHONY CUREINGTON,

Plaintiff,

versus

GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas ( 92-CV-860 )

October 22, 1996

Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:* For this action under the WARN ACT, 29 U.S.C. § 2101 et seq., General Dynamics appeals the denial of its FED. R. CIV. P. 12(c) motion, claiming that this action is time-barred. We affirm. See Staudt v. Glastron, 92 F.3d 312 (5th Cir. 1996).

AFFIRMED

*

Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Halkias v. General Dynamics, (5th Cir. 1996).

Halkias v. General Dynamics (Halkias v. General Dynamics) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related