UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit
No. 97-60462
Summary Calendar
RICHARD MCBRIDE; BLONDINE MARIE MCBRIDE,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
VERSUS
HALTER MARINE SHIPYARD; FRANK SMITH; JERRY HALL; EMERALD
SMITH; JAY JOHNSON; BOBBY HOWELL; MARTIN WILNER; TIM COOK,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 97-60463
Summary Calendar
RICHARD MCBRIDE; BLONDINE MARIE MCBRIDE,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
VERSUS
HALTER MARINE SHIPYARD; FRANK SMITH; JERRY HALL; EMERALD
SMITH; JAY JOHNSON; BOBBY HOWELL; MARTIN WILNER; TIM COOK; JAMES
CLARK; BUDDY O’BRIAN; RELIANCE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
(1:96-CV-238-BrR & 1:96-CV-246-RR)
May 13, 1998
Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Richard McBride was employed by Halter Marine, Inc. at its
facility in Moss Point, Mississippi. On April 13, 1994, McBride
allegedly suffered an on-the-job injury. On September 14, 1994,
when he returned to work from this injury, he failed a routine drug
screening test which was administered in accordance with routine
company policy. Based on Mr. McBride’s failure to pass the routine
drug test, his employment was terminated. Subsequently, McBride
instituted a claim under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’
Compensation Act and McBride and his wife filed two lawsuits
against Halter Marine, the first in state court which was removed
to federal court and the second filed directly in federal court
after the first had been removed to federal court. The two suits
pending in federal court were consolidated. At a case management
conference on July 24, 1996 before the magistrate judge, the
parties negotiated and agreed upon a voluntary settlement of both
actions and such settlement was entered of record. Subsequently,
*
Pursuant to 5TH 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
2
on August 5, 1996, the district court entered an order on joint
motion of all parties dismissing the case with prejudice with each
party to bear its own costs. The separate claims of McBride under
the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act were excepted
from this settlement and dismissal. On April 25, 1997, McBride and
his wife filed a motion under FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b) to set aside the
settlement and the judgments. The district court denied any relief
to plaintiffs and the plaintiffs appeal.
We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the record excerpts,
and relevant portions of the record itself. The district court has
broad discretion under Rule 60(b) to grant or deny relief. We find
nothing in the record which would indicate that the district court
abused its discretion in denying the plaintiffs any relief under
Rule 60(b). The order denying any further relief is
AFFIRMED.
3