Elnora Moses v. Texas Commission on Env Qlty, No. 12-10262 (5th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-10262 Document: 00512009388 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/04/2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 12-10262 Summary Calendar October 4, 2012 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk ELNORA MOSES, Plaintiff - Appellant v. TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, Defendant - Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:10-CV-522 Before DAVIS, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* After Elnora Moses ( Moses ) was placed on disciplinary probation for creating a disruptive work environment and ultimately terminated for failing to meet the requirements of her conditional Return to Work Certification, she filed suit against her former employer, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ( TCEQ ). Moses s complaint alleged that she suffered from a hostile work environment due to sexual harassment and that TCEQ unlawfully * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Case: 12-10262 Document: 00512009388 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/04/2012 No. 11-60533 retaliated against her for complaining about the harassment. Finding that Moses failed to present facts sufficient to meet the prima facie requirements of a Title VII hostile work environment claim based on sexual harassment or a Title VII retaliation case, the district court granted TCEQ s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Moses s suit with prejudice. Moses s deficient briefing fails to cite any evidence or legal authority supporting her claims. Although pro se briefs are afforded liberal construction, arguments must be briefed in order to be preserved. Yohey v. Collings, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). Even assuming that Moses properly briefed her claims, the record shows that the district court properly concluded that there is no genuine issue of material fact. AFFIRMED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
