Opinion · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

SULLIVAN v. EL PASO CORP., 270 Fed.Appx. 305 (5th Cir. 2008)

Timothy SULLIVAN; Michael Prosser, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. EL PASOCORP.; El Paso Mktg. Energy Gas Corporation; El Paso Merch. EnergyGas Corp., Defendants-Appellees., 270 F. App'x 305 (5th Cir. 2008)

Type
Opinion
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
2008-03-17
Topic
general

SULLIVAN v. EL PASO CORP., 270 Fed.Appx. 305 (5th Cir. 2008) Timothy SULLIVAN; Michael Prosser, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. EL PASOCORP.; El Paso Marketing Energy Gas Corporation; El Paso Merchant EnergyGas Corporation, Defendants-Appellees. No. 07-20340.United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. March 17, 2008. [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Stuart M.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed SULLIVAN v. EL PASO CORP., 270 Fed.Appx. 305 (5th Cir. 2008). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

SULLIVAN v. EL PASO CORP.,270 Fed.Appx. 305(5th Cir. 2008)
Timothy SULLIVAN; Michael Prosser, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. EL PASO
CORP.; El Paso Marketing Energy Gas Corporation; El Paso Merchant Energy
Gas Corporation, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-20340.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 17, 2008.
Stuart M. Nelkin, Nelkin Nelkin, Houston, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Fraser Angus McAlpine, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Feld, Houston, TX, for Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, No. 4:06-CV-2948.
Before JONES, Chief Judge, DAVIS and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:fn*
After reviewing the record and considering the briefs and argument of counsel, we are satisfied the district court committed no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court essentially for the reasons assigned in its careful Memorandum Opinion and Order of April 2, 2007,2007 WL 1032349.

AFFIRMED.
  1. [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ↩
  2. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. ↩