UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit
No. 01-30271
FARM CREDIT BANK OF TEXAS
Plaintiff - Appellant - Cross-Appellee
VERSUS
LORITA RICHARD GUIDRY; ET AL
Defendants
LORITA RICHARD GUIDRY; PATRICK GUIDRY
Defendants - Appellees - Cross-Appellees
DAVID GUIDRY, Trustee for Lorita Guidry, Irrevocable Trust
Trustee - Appellee - Cross-Appellees
------------------------
LORITA RICHARD GUIDRY
Plaintiff - Appellee - Cross-Appellee
DAVID GUIDRY, Trustee for Lorita Guidry, Irrevocable Trust
Trustee - Appellee - Cross-Appellee
VERSUS
LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; ET AL
Defendants
LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Defendant - Appellee - Cross-Appellant
UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY COMPANY
Appellee
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Middle District of Louisiana, Baton Rouge
No. 98-CV-392-B
June 14, 2002
Before DAVIS, DeMOSS and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Since the first appeal in this case1 the district court has
resolved all issues and rendered a final judgment. Farm Credit
raises three issues in this appeal. It contends the district court
erred in (1) refusing to hold the Guidrys and Lincoln National Life
Insurance Company(LNL) in contempt of court; (2) refusing to hold
United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company(USF&G) as surety
responsible for the balance of the judgment under the terms of the
appeal bond and (3) refusing to cast LNL in judgment for the sums
the Trustee paid out of the annuity account while the appeal was
pending. LNL filed a cross appeal challenging the district court’s
denial of its Rule 60(b)(6) motion predicated on an enactment by
the Louisiana legislature after our first appeal was decided.
After careful review of the record, the briefs of the parties
and arguments of counsel, we are satisfied that the district court
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under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
See Farm Credit Bank of Texas v. Guidry, 110 F.3d 1147(5th Cir.
1997).
2
committed no reversible error.
First, we find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s
refusal to hold the Guidrys and LNL in contempt of court for the
payment from the trust to the beneficiary during the pendency of
the appeal. The district court was well within its discretion in
concluding that no good purpose would be served in holding the
Guidrys in contempt because they were impecunious and a jail
sentence would serve no good purpose. The garnishment was not
served on LNL and the district court was entitled to conclude that
the garnishment order did not bind LNL.
Second, we agree with the district court’s reading of the
appeal bond and concur in its refusal to impose further liability
under the bond on the surety USF&G.
On Lincoln National’s cross appeal, we are satisfied that the
district court did not abuse its considerable discretion in denying
LNL’s Rule 60(b)(6) motion predicated on an act of the Louisiana
legislature enacted after the relevant issue had been litigated and
had become the law of the case.
Because the district court committed no reversible error, its
judgment is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
3