UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 98-20214
Summary Calendar
_____________________
ALFRED E. DAWSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
THE CITY OF HOUSTON,
Defendants-Appellees.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H-96-CV-3943)
_________________________________________________________________
January 13, 1999
Before KING, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Alfred Dawson, pro se, appeals the adverse summary judgment in
his Tile VII action against the City of Houston.
We review a district court's grant of summary judgment de
novo, applying the same standard as the district court. E.g., OHM
Remediation Services v. Evans Cooperage Co., Inc., 116 F.3d 1574,
1579 (5th Cir. 1997). Summary judgment is appropriate where “there
is no genuine issue of material fact and ... the moving party is
entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c).
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
Dawson claims that he was excluded from job advancements
because of his race; that he was discharged (during his
probationary period) because of his race; and that the City
intentionally inflicted emotional distress upon him. Pursuant to
our de novo review of the record and review of the briefs, summary
judgment is proper for essentially the reasons stated by the
district court. See Dawson v. City of Houston, No. H-96-3943, slip
op. (S.D.Tex. Feb. 2, 1998).
AFFIRMED