Pullam v. Albemarle Corp

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-31364
Summary Calendar
SANDRA S. PULLAM,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
ALBERMARLE CORP.,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 97-CV-709-A
--------------------
May 10, 2000
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appellant, Sandra S. Pullam, appeals from a summary judgment
dismissing her age discrimination claim against appellee,
Albermarle Corporation. The district court concluded that Pullam
had failed to establish even a prima facie case of discrimination
and, alternatively, that Pullam failed to create a fact issue
through competent proof that appellee’s non-discriminatory reason
for termination was a pretext for age discrimination.
Although Pullam’s argument on appeal deals almost

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 99-31364
-2-
exclusively with the district court’s pretext finding, we have
liberally construed her brief to include an attack on the
district court’s finding that she failed to establish a prima
facie case. Our de novo review of the summary judgment record,
the court’s judgment, and the arguments raised on appeal lead us
to conclude that the district court did not err in dismissing
Pullam’s suit. We affirm the judgment essentially for the
reasons set forth in the Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment
signed September 9, 1999 and the ruling on Motion for
Reconsideration signed by Judge Parker, dated November 23, 1999.
Finally, we deny appellee’s request for damages and double costs
pursuant to Fed. R. App. Proc. 38.
AFFIRMED, request for damages and double costs DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --