Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Zeising v. Shelton
Zeising v. Shelton, 599 F. App'x 231 (5th Cir. 2015)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 2015-04-14
- Topic
- general
holding that “other courts addressing this issue have found that the PREA does not establish a private cause of action” | concluding that PREA does not create a 7 The Eighth Amendment is applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment and prohibits the infliction of “cruel and unusual punishments.” Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294, 297 (1991 | concluding that PREA does not create a private cause of action | noting that “other courts addressing this issue have found that the PREA does not establish a private cause of action for allegations of prison rape” | finding that PREA does not afford a private right of action | finding that PREA does not afford a private right of action | finding that PREA does not afford a private right of action | affirming dismissal of PREA claim as frivolous because PREA does not establish a private cause of action for prison rape | dismissing a prisoner’s Section 1983 claim alleging violations of PREA as “frivolous” | “other courts addressing this issue have found that the PREA does not establish a private cause of action” | “Insofar as Krieg argues that his rights under the [PREA] were violated, other courts addressing this issue have found that the PREA does not establish a private cause of action for allegations of prison rape.” | “Insofar as Krieg argues that his rights under the [PREA] were violated , other courts addressing this issue have found that the PREA does not extablsih a private cause of action for allegations of prison rape” | “[A]ny claim raised under the PREA is properly dismissed as frivolous.” | “[A]ny claim raised under the PREA is properly dismissed as frivolous.” | “Insofar as Krieg argues that his rights under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 ... were violated, other courts addressing this issue have found that the PREA does not establish a private cause of action for allegations of prison rape.” (citations omitted) | relying on persuasive out-of-circuit cases making the same point
Citator
- Cited by
- 31 opinions
The judgment of the district court is affirmed because an enforceable oral contract was not mutually agreed upon by these parties. The acquisition, purchase and terms, of the 29 Popeye’s restaurants, how they would be operated and what — if any — consideration and role Zeising would contribute, was left wide open. At best, it could be said only that they agreed to agree, but that is not an enforceable contract under Louisiana or Georgia law. See McNeely v. Town of Vidalia, 157 La. 338, 102 So. 422, 423 (1924); Moss v. Moss, 265 Ga. 802, 463 S.E.2d 9 (1995). Likewise, Shelton did not have a contract with Dixie, nor did he owe it a fiduciary duty. Ga. Code § 14-11-304(a).
AFFIRMED.
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.