
    Joe CARRABBA, Jr., Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; Joe Melton, Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; Craig McKnight, Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; Robert H. Burrows, Jr., Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; Barbara A. Williams, Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; Loyd Wellesley, Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; Willard P. Correll, Sr., Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; Bruce Philpot, Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; J. Bruce Gray, Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; Rick Williams, Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; A. Joe Cutrer, Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; Roberto G. Fernandez Vinas, Individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated; Thomas D. McCarthy; Wylie Holmes; Dave Cooper; Ed Fortner; Jack D. Neal; Floyd E. Fulcher; Jack W. Sprabary; Robert L. Stockton; Carroll E. Brown; Michael J. Hammer; Scott E. Peterson; William H. Mansfield, Jr.; James S. Standifer; Bettie J. Garrett; Cherie J. Stowe; Arvil R. Martin, Jr.; Sanford W. Maynard; Denise P. Miller; Everett G. Grosgebauer; Gregory E. Smith; Michael Chessmore; Ima Dell Irvin, Individually & on behalf of all others similar situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross-Appellees, v. RANDALLS FOOD MARKETS, INC., Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant.
    No. 00-10520.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    May 22, 2001.
    Robert Lee Wright (argued), William G. Whitehall, Elaine A. Murphy, Gardere & Wynne, Dallas, TX, Thomas F. Dunn, Dunn & Roark, Arlington, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross-Appellees.
    David T. Harvin (argued), Wallis M. Hampton, Vinson & Elkins, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant.
    Before JONES, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The court has carefully considered this appeal in light of the excellent briefs, oral arguments, and pertinent portions of the record. Having done so, we find no reversible error of fact or law by the district court and affirm based on that court’s conscientious, well-reasoned opinions, which will be published.

AFFIRMED.  