* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-50058 Summary Calendar SYLVIA S. LOVE, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus WALGREEN, CO., Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (A-96-CV-830) July 8, 1998 Before SMITH, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Sylvia Love appeals the summary judgment in favor of Wa lgreenÂ’s on her claims of hostile environment discrimination based upon disability, general disability discrimination, and fraud. Love contends that the magistrate judge erred in holding that she did not suffer any actionable disability discrimination; that her disability discrimination claim is time-barred; and that she did not rely on any misrepresentation of WalgreenÂ’s that would constitute fraud.

Needless to say, we review a grant of summary judgment de novo , applying the same standard as the district court. S ee Little v. Liquid Air Corp. , 37 F.3d 1069, 1075 (5th Cir. 1994). Summary judgment is proper where there is no ma terial fact issue and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. I d. ; see F ED .

R. C IV . P. 56(c).

Having reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties, we AFFIRM for essentially th e same reasons stated by the magistrate judge in his comprehensive and well-reasoned opinion. L ove v. Walgreen Co. , No. A-96-CA-830 ADA (W.D. Tex.

Dec. 8, 1997).

AFFIRMED