Baung vs. Entergy Corporation, (5th Cir. 2000)

Text

---

* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-30706 Summary Calendar JU H. BAUNG,, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus ENTERGY CORPORATION; ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 98-CV-1786-N March 6, 2000 Before GARWOOD, BENAVIDES and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM * : Ju H. Baung (Baung) appeals the district court§ 26102, et seq . Baung contends the district court erred because he allegedly established a prima facie case under FMLA and because EOIÂ’s “good faith” reasons for terminating him are not a defense to liability under FMLA.

We assume arguendo that Baung made a prima facie case under FMLA. In addition, having reviewed the district courtÂ’s opinion, the briefs, and the record, we find that EOI offered a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for BaungÂ’s discharge and that Baung failed to produce any summary judgment evidence which would sustain a finding that EOIÂ’s articulated reason for his discharge was not its real and sole reason, much less that the real reason for his termination was discrimination or his exercise of rights under the FMLA. Chaffin v. Carter Co., Inc. , 179 F.3d 316, 319- 20 (5th Cir. 1999). We also reject BaungÂ’s argument that whether or not EOI in fact terminated him only because it concluded that he had failed to timely end his outside employment as directed by EOI is relevant only with respect to the amount of damages he should be awarded under FMLA. Id . AFFIRMED.

---