Eric Baggett v. Oncor Electric Delivery Co., No. 18-10918 (5th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 18-10918 Document: 00514942636 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/03/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 18-10918 Summary Calendar FILED May 3, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk ERIC BAGGETT, Plaintiff−Appellant, versus ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANY, L.L.C., Defendant− Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas No. 3:17-CV-3136 Before SMITH, WIENER, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Eric Baggett sued his former employer under Title VII and the Age 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 18-10918 Document: 00514942636 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/03/2019 No. 18-10918 Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). On appeal, he abandons Title VII and complains only of the dismissal of his ADEA claim. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) dismissed Baggett’s charge as untimely. We need not rest our decision on that alleged deficiency, however. As the district court carefully explained, “Even if the Court were to ignore the EEOC’s dismissal of the Charge as untimely, the allegations in the First Amended Complaint are insufficient to state a claim of age discrimination under the ADEA. Baggett has not sufficiently alleged two of the elements—that he was qualified for the position and that he was (i) replaced by someone outside the protected class, (ii) replaced by someone younger, or (iii) otherwise discharged because of his age.” The district court also noted that Baggett “has already amended his pleadings once, failed to respond to the Motion to Dismiss, and did not request leave to amend [, so] allowing Baggett the opportunity to replead would be futile.” There is no reversible error in the district court’s determinations. The judgment of dismissal is AFFIRMED, essentially for the reasons given by the district court. 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.
