253 F. App'x 402

Shirlene GRAY, Plaintiff—Appellant v. SAGE TELECOM INC, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 06-11132.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 7, 2007.

Jerry Hicks, Winstead, Sechrest & Minick, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Lawrence J. McNamara, Locke Liddell & Sapp, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED for essentially the reasons *403given by the district court in its Memorandum Opinion and Order entered October 3, 2006, which cannot be improved upon. The district court, in perhaps an excess of caution, discussed the impact of Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90, 123 S.Ct. 2148, 156 L.Ed.2d 84 (2003), on claims of retaliation under Title VII. In plaintiff-appellant Shirlene Gray’s appellate brief, that issue is inadequately briefed (as it was in the district court), and in affirming the district court’s judgment, we do not address (because we need not, see L & A Contracting Co. v. Southern Concrete Services, Inc., 17 F.3d 106, 113 (5th Cir.1994)) that issue or the district court’s conclusions with respect thereto.

AFFIRMED.

Gray v. Sage Telecom Inc.
253 F. App'x 402

Case Details

Name
Gray v. Sage Telecom Inc.
Decision Date
Nov 7, 2007
Citations

253 F. App'x 402

Jurisdiction
United States

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!