IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
______________________________________
No. 98-30458
______________________________________
VENESSA S. PATTERSON;
MATTHEW PATTERSON, JR.
Plaintiff-Appellants,
versus
PREMIER BANK; CLAUDE PLATTE;
JAMES LOPEZ,
Defendants-Appellees.
_____________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
(95-CV-1975)
_____________________________________________
February 12, 1999
Before JOLLY, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
In this Title VII sexual harassment case, Plaintiffs-
Appellants Venessa and Matthew Patterson ask us to reverse the
district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendant-
Appellant Premier Bank,1 dismissing the Pattersons’ action. They
insist that the district court erred in concluding that (1) the
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
1
Defendants Platte and Lopez are now deceased and have
been dismissed as defendants pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. 25(a).
conduct complained of was neither severe nor pervasive and thus was
not actionable under Title VII, (2) the actions taken by Premier to
deter recurrence of such inappropriate behavior after Mrs.
Patterson complained were prompt and adequate, and (3) the
inappropriate conduct of Lopez, a non-supervisory fellow employee,
was not sufficiently egregious to be actionable under Louisiana
law, either as a violation of state anti-discrimination law or as
the intentional infliction of emotional distress. Our de novo
review of the record on appeal in light of the applicable law and
the arguments of counsel advanced in their respective appellate
briefs and their oral presentations to this court, satisfies us
that summary judgment was properly granted for the reasons set
forth by the district court.
AFFIRMED.
2