Sauceda v. City of Del Rio, et al

02-51336Court of Appeals for the Fifth CircuitAug 12, 2003

Full text

* District Judge of the Eastern District of Louisiana, sitting by designation.
** 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
August 12, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
____________
No. 02-51336
____________
FLORENCIO P. SAUCEDA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CITY OF DEL RIO, by and through its City Council; DORA
ALCALA, Mayor, in their individual capacities; RANDY POHLER,
in their individual capacities,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Western District of Texas
No. DR-01-CV-4-OLG
Before EMILIO M. GARZA and DENNIS, Circuit Judges, and VANCE*, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:**
Florencio P. Sauceda appeals the district court’s summary judgment dismissal of his claims
against the City of Del Rio, Texas (“the City”) and various individual defendants. This dispute arises

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
out of the City’s termination of Sauceda’s employment as city manager. On appeal, Sauceda
contends that he is entitled to severance benefits because the City failed to comply with the good
cause provision of his employment contract. Sauceda argues that his rejection of the City’s offer of
a good cause hearing did not waive his rights under that provision. Sauceda also contends that the
City Council’s actions in terminating his employment violated the Texas Open Meetings Act, TEX.
GOV’T CODE § 551.001 et seq.
We have read the briefs, heard the arguments of counsel, and consulted the pertinent portions
of the record. On the basis of the applicable law and the record, we affirm the dismissal of Sauceda’s
claims for essentially the same reasons as those given by the district court. In particular, we affirm
the district court’s conclusion that Sauceda waived any right to a good cause determination by
rejecting the City’s offer to hold a hearing on good cause.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.