Johnson v. United Airlines, Inc.

Fifth Circuit

Johnson v. United Airlines, Inc.

670 F. App'x 228

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 21, 2016

DocketNo. 16-20331 Summary Calendar

StatusPublished

This text of 670 F. App'x 228 (Johnson v. United Airlines, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Johnson v. United Airlines, Inc., 670 F. App'x 228 (5th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

*

This court has carefully considered this appeal in light of the briefs and pertinent portions of the record. In this contract dispute, plaintiff-appellant claims that she is entitled to Continental’s highest frequent flyer status for life. The magistrate judge addressed all the issues raised by the parties and concluded that the appellant could not demonstrate the existence of a valid contract for the highest frequent flyer status for life. The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation and granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. We AFFIRM for essentially the reasons set forth in the district court.

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

PER CURIAM:

*

This court has carefully considered this appeal in light of the briefs and pertinent portions of the record. In this contract dispute, plaintiff-appellant claims that she is entitled to Continental’s highest frequent flyer status for life. The magistrate judge addressed all the issues raised by the parties and concluded that the appellant could not demonstrate the existence of a valid contract for the highest frequent flyer status for life. The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation and granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. We AFFIRM for essentially the reasons set forth in the district court.

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

670 F. App'x 228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-united-airlines-inc-ca5-2016.