green
Positive treatment
4.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Rylander v. The Kroger Co.
Du Pont de Nemours and Co., 653 F.2d 915, 920 (Sth Cir. 1981)); Evans v. Turner, 59 F.3d 1242, at *1 (Sth Cir. 1995) (same).
discussed
Cited "see"
Joseph Hauser v. Schneider Electric USA, Inc.
See Salas v. Gallegos, 59 F.3d 1242 , 1995 WL 413073 , at *2–3 (5th Cir. 1995) (unpublished table decision) (disagreeing with district court’s ruling that plaintiff could not make out prima facie case but affirming because plaintiff could not show that company’s legitimate reason for the firing was pretextual). 2 Schneider fired Hauser for the classic nondiscriminatory reason of poor performance.
cited
Cited "see"
Frakes v. Crete Carrier Corp.
Cancer Inst. v. Anderson, 991 S.W.2d 55, 60 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1998, pet. denied); see Dollar v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 59 F.3d 1242 , 1995 WL 413067, *2 (5th Cir.1995) (unpublished).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Davis v. Louisiana Appellate Project
See Lewis, 508 F. App’x at 344 ; see also Humphrey v. Luna, 59 F.3d 1242 (5th Cir. 1995) (affirming dismissal, as malicious and frivolous, complaints that “by and large contain[ed] ‘stream of consciousness’ lists of alleged acts of wrongdoing . . . .”).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hampton
v.
Dept. HHS[*]
NO. 95-10331
United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.
June 21, 1995
Appeal From: N.D.Tex., No. 3:95-CV-400-X
1
DISMISSED.
*
Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 5th Cir.R. 34.2