New Bethany Home vs. State of Louisiana (5th Cir. 1999)

Federal Circuits, 5th Cir. (September 28, 1999)

Docket number: 98-31396


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/new-bethany-home-vs-state-louisiana-19985731
Id. vLex: VLEX-19985731

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-31396

Summary Calendar

MACK FORD, ETC; ET AL

Plaintiffs,

MACK FORD, Reverend, THELMA FORD;

NEW BETHANY HOME FOR GIRLS; NEW

BETHANY BAPTIST CHURCH; NEW BETHANY

SCHOOL; NEW BETHANY HOME FOR BOYS;

NEW BETHANY BAPTIST SCHOOL,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

STATE OF LOUISIANA, ETC.; ET AL,

Defendants,

STATE OF LOUISIANA, on behalf of

Louisiana Department of Social

Services, on behalf of Louisiana

State Fire Marshal; JAMES MYERS,

Fire Inspector, individually & in

his official capacity; MICHAEL

CAMMAROSANO, Fire Inspector,

individually & in his official

capacity; VICKY HAYNES, social

worker, individually & in her

official capacity; DENISE FAIR,

social worker, individually & in her

official capacity; V.J. BELLA, State

Fire Marshal, individually & in his

official capacity; MADLYN BAGNERIS,

Secretary of Louisiana Department of

Social Services, individually & in

her official capacity,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 96-CV-2065

September 23, 1999 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:* The plaintiffs appeal from a grant of summary judgment to the defendants in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case. The appellants contend that the appellees acted out of retaliatory motives when the appellees investigated alleged child safety and fire safety violations at the New Bethany Home. However, the appellants have failed to produce evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that the appellees so acted. See Bodenheimer v. PPG Indus., 5 F.3d 955, 956 (5th Cir. 1993). The district court thus did not err in granting summary judgment to the appellees.

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access