Hensley v. General Motors Corp

03-10263Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit21 oct. 2003

Texte intégral

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, t he court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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
October 20, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
_________________
No. 03-10263
(Summary Calendar)
_________________
DONALD HENSLEY; ET AL
Plaintiffs,
DONALD HENSLEY
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION
Defendant - Appellee
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Northern District of Texas, Dallas
USDC No. 3:99-CV-2370-P
Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*

-- 1 of 2 --

Donald Hensley appeals the district court’s grant of the defendant’s motion for summary
judgment on his discriminations claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §
1981.
Arguments must be briefed to be preserved. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir.
1993). Although we apply less stringent standards to parties proceeding pro se than to litigants, pro
se parties must still brief the issues and reasonably comply with FED R. APP. P. 28. Grant v. Cuellar,
59 F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995). When an appellant fails to identify any error in the district court’s
analysis, it is the same as if the appellant had not appealed that judgment. Brinkman v. Dallas County
Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). FED R. APP. P. 28(a)(9)(A) requires the
appellant state the reasons he deserves the requested relief with citations to authorities. Yohey, 985
F.2d at 225.
Hensley makes no arguments and cites no authorities. He fails to challenge the district court’s
reasons for granting summary judgment or cite specific fact ual or legal errors made by the lower
court. Consequently, Hensly has failed to adequately brief the issues for appeal. See FED R. APP. P.
28(a)(9)(A); Yohey, 985 F.2d at 225.
This appeal is frivolous and without merit and is accordingly DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

-- 2 of 2 --

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.