La Tonya Judon v. EP Energy, L.L.C., No. 18-20407 (5th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 18-20407 Document: 00514861394 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/06/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 18-20407 Summary Calendar LA TONYA D. JUDON, FILED March 6, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Plaintiff - Appellant v. EP ENERGY, L.L.C., Defendant - Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:16-CV-1834 Before JOLLY, COSTA, and HO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* La Tonya Judon sued EP Energy for retaliation under the Family and Medical Leave Act (the “FMLA”) and for hostile work environment. The district court granted summary judgment for EP Energy and Judon appeals the dismissal. On appeal, Judon brings additional claims for the first time. We do not consider these claims. See Stewart Glass & Mirror, Inc. v. U.S. Auto 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 18-20407 Document: 00514861394 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/06/2019 No. 18-20407 Glass Disc. Ctrs., Inc., 200 F.3d 307, 316–17 (5th Cir. 2000) (“It is a bedrock principle of appellate review that claims raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered. This rule is equally applicable in summary judgment cases.”). First, Judon claims EP Energy dismissed her in retaliation because she requested leave under the FMLA. Second, Judon argues, because of her disabilities, EP Energy created a hostile work environment. EP Energy responds that they terminated Judon because of her demonstrated pattern of poor performance, disciplinary actions, and insubordination. An employer may point to a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for termination as a defense to a retaliation claim. See Ion v. Chevron USA, Inc., 731 F.3d 379, 390 (5th Cir. 2013). Regarding her second preserved claim, Judon only points to two instances of hostility over three years of employment to establish a hostile work environment. Neither instance rises to the necessary level to show a hostile work environment. Patton v. Jacobs Eng’g Group, Inc., 874 F.3d 437, 445 (5th Cir. 2017). We have reviewed the briefs, the applicable law, and relevant parts of the record. The district court committed no reversible error. The judgment is 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.
