Shanks v. Alliedsignal Inc

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Shanks v. Alliedsignal Inc. Read the opinion of the Court — 169 F.3d 988
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided July 19, 2001·No. 00-20798·Unpublished

Opinion

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-20798

EUGENE E. SHANKS, SR., doing business as Fliteline Maintenance, Inc., doing business as Fliteline Maintenance; FARM AND RANCH AERIAL APPLICATOR SERVICES, INC.; GULF COAST AG, INC.; FLITELINE MAINTENANCE, INC.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

ALLIEDSIGNAL, INC., doing business as Garrett Engine Division; ED ADHERNS, doing business as Garrett Engine Division, doing business as Alliedsignal, Inc.; JERRY TORRENCE, doing business as Garrett Engine Division, doing business as Alliedsignal, Inc.; PETER BAKER, doing business as Garrett Engine Division, doing business as Alliedsignal, Inc.; SANDY MEOUR, doing business as Garrett Engine Division, doing business as Alliedsignal, Inc.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (H-94-CV-1906)

July 16, 2001

Before KING, Chief Judge, BARKSDALE, Circuit Judge, and NOWLIN, District Judge.1

PER CURIAM:2

1 District Judge of the Western District of Texas, sitting by designation. 2 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that Having considered the briefs and pertinent parts of the

record, and having heard oral argument, and essentially for the

reasons stated by the district court in its comprehensive and well-

reasoned opinion, the judgment is

AFFIRMED.

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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

Shanks v. Alliedsignal Inc, (5th Cir. 2001).

Shanks v. Alliedsignal Inc (Shanks v. Alliedsignal Inc) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.