Ford v. Pennzoil

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT ______________________ No. 97-31320 ______________________ DONN FORD; CARLEE GERALD; KERRY THOMAS, Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus PENNZOIL, ET AL, Defendants, SPIDER STAGING CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES, Defendant-Appellee. __________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, New Orleans (94-CV-3948-I) ___________________________________________________________________ November 5, 1999 Before DUHÉ, BARKSDALE, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges: PER CURIAM:* AFFIRMED. See 5th Cir. Rule 47.6. (The motion to strike Appellants’ substitute brief is DENIED. Judge Barksdale would have granted the motion and, in addition, would have required Appellants’ counsel to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed against him in the light of the numerous substantive changes made by counsel in preparing the substitute brief. Along this line, Appellants’ * Pursuant to 5th Cir. Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under t he limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir.l Rule 47.5.4. counsel is warned that sanctions will be imposed against him if, in the future, he engages in conduct similar to that challenged by the motion to strike.) 2