HERRING v. NEWFIRST STATE BANK III (2019)

Charles Herring sued NewFirst National Bank (which he inaccurately calls NewFirst State Bank) and certain individuals for race discrimination under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and state-law theories. The district court converted the motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment and granted summary judgment.

The district court carefully explained its ruling in a concise but more-than-adequate five-page opinion entered December 24, 2018. The court recounted that Herring was discharged from a janitorial contract because surveillance video showed that he had stolen food from the bank. Herring had a subcontract with American Paper & Janitorial Products, Inc. The district court properly reasoned, inter alia, that “[w]hen Herring stole the pastries, he violated the contract. Paper did not violate the law by cancelling the contract.” Regarding Title VII, “Herring was never an employee, nor did he file a charge with the EEOC. As a result, Herring must lose.”

The summary judgment is AFFIRMED, essentially for the reasons advanced by the district court.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.