Legal Opinion
Washington v. M. Hanna Construction Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided November 14, 2008No. 08-20351UnpublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM: *
Plaintiff Raymond Williams Washington, who is pro se, appeals multiple rulings by the district court in his suit against his former employer, M. Hanna Construction Inc. (“M. Hanna”), and individual Defendants Stad Carlson 1 and “Does A Thru Z.” (“A through Z Defendants”). For the following reasons, we AFFIRM.
Plaintiff first contends that he was entitled to default judgment against M. Hanna because its motion to dismiss was purportedly filed one day outside of the 20-day period allowed for filing a responsive pleading or motion under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12. A default judgment is a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Sun Bank of Ocala v. Pelican Homestead and Savings Association, and Third Party v. American First Mortgage Funding Corp., Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
- King v. DoganCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
- Mota v. University of Texas Houston Health Science CenterCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
- Mason & Hanger--Silas Mason Company, Inc. v. Metal Trades Council of Amarillo, Texas and Vicinity, Afl-CioCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1984
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Yang Kun "Michael" ChungDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2017
- O'Neal v. Cargill, Inc.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2016
- Marks v. Washington Wholesale Liquor CompanyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Harris v. Auxilium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2009
- Chapa v. American Airlines Group, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2022
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.