IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_______________
m 00-41264
_______________
JAMES PALMER NEILL, III, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
JAMES PALMER NEILL, III; JODY AYKE; MARC ANDREW BIRENBAUM;
WILLIAM BUTLER; CHERYL BUTLER; et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
VERSUS
FORD MOTOR COMPANY; DAVID J. BICKERSTAFF;
DAVID J. BICKERSTAFF AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED,
Defendants-Appellees.
_________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
m 5:99-CV-106
_________________________
November 13, 2001
Before SMITH and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges, and CUMMINGS,*
District Judge.
PER CURIAM:**
Plaintiffs bring an action they describe as fraud in the
inducement of various settlement agreements regarding litigation in
state courts. They appeal the district court’s dismissal, which
was based on considerations of comity and the Anti-Injunction Act.
We have reviewed the briefs and applicable portions of the record
and have heard the arguments of counsel. We conclude that the dis-
trict court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing.
Accordingly, we affirm, without prejudice to the plaintiffs’ right
to file bills of review in the respective state courts. See
Dubroff v. Dubroff, 883 F.3d 557 (5th Cir. 1987).
AFFIRMED.
*
District Judge of the Northern District of Texas, sitting by designation.
**
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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.
2