# Brown v. Jabez Sport Clips, LA L.L.C.

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · October 11, 2013 · 540 F. App'x 464

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1085176

## Case

- **Full name:** Rita BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. JABEZ SPORT CLIPS, LA L.L.C., Defendant-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** October 11, 2013
- **Citations:** 540 F. App'x 464
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** King, Davis, Elrod
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1085176

## Opinion text

Case: 13-30097 Document: 00512404534 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/11/2013

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
October 11, 2013

No. 13-30097 Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk

RITA BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

JABEZ SPORT CLIPS, LA L.L.C.,

Defendant - Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 2:10-CV-852

Before KING, DAVIS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Rita Brown, plaintiff-appellant in this Title VII racial harassment action
against defendant-appellee Jabez Sport Clips, La, L.L.C., her prior employer,
appeals the district court’s decision to admit Brown’s testimony, on cross-
examination, regarding her two prior racial discrimination suits against another
hair salon employer containing allegations similar to those made against Sport

*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-30097 Document: 00512404534 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/11/2013

No. 13-30097

Clips in this case. The district court concluded that the probative value of the
evidence of the “remarkably similar” prior suits, together with evidence of
potentially fraudulent activity associated therewith, substantially outweighed
the danger of unfair prejudice. We need not decide whether the district court
erred in admitting the evidence because even if the court erred, the error was
harmless. There was substantial other evidence weighing against Brown’s
credibility and in favor of the jury’s verdict for Sport Clips.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1085176. Public record. Not legal advice.