               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                        _____________________

                             No. 98-21128
                           Summary Calendar
                        _____________________

WILLIS C. McALLISTER,

                                                Plaintiff-Appellant,

                               versus

DANYA McINTYRE; ET AL.,

                                                         Defendants,

DANYA McINTYRE; ROBERT HALF
INTERNATIONAL, INC.; ROSEMARY
BROTHERS; ANDERSEN CONSULTING,
INC.; KELSEY SKIBA, also known
as Lisa Skiba; TENNECO BUSINESS
SERVICES, INC.,

                                            Defendants-Appellees.
_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Southern District of Texas
                       USDC No. H-97-CV-3718
_________________________________________________________________

                          November 10, 1999

Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Willis C. McAllister appeals the district court’s dismissal of

a lawsuit he brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act,

42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; the Age Discrimination in Employment

Act, 29 U.S.C. 621 et seq.; and other civil rights and common law

claims. The lawsuit was dismissed because of McAllister’s abuse of

     *
      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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
the discovery process and his refusal to obey valid court discovery

orders. Review of the arguments and the record on appeal show that

the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the

lawsuit.   See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(C); Coane v. Ferrara Pan

Candy Co., 898 F.2d 1030, 1032 (5th Cir. 1990); see also FDIC v.

Conner, 20 F.3d 1376, 1380-81 (5th Cir. 1994).        McAllister’s

argument that the district court erred in admitting into evidence

a copy of excerpts of the videotape deposition and transcripts of

such deposition is without merit.   See Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(a)(2).

                                                  A F F I R M E D.




                                2
