Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

James Murungi v. Touro Infirmary, 13-30557 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 13-30557 Visitors: 21
Filed: Sep. 11, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: Case: 13-30557 Document: 00512370077 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/11/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED September 11, 2013 No. 13-30557 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JAMES H. MURUNGI, Plaintiff–Appellant, versus TOURO INFIRMARY; LEE B. HANKINS; RAQUEL S. MARGULIS; THERESA WILLIAMS, Defendants–Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:11-CV-1823 Before J
More
Case: 13-30557 Document: 00512370077 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/11/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED September 11, 2013 No. 13-30557 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JAMES H. MURUNGI, Plaintiff–Appellant, versus TOURO INFIRMARY; LEE B. HANKINS; RAQUEL S. MARGULIS; THERESA WILLIAMS, Defendants–Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:11-CV-1823 Before JONES, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* James Murungi, pro se in the district court and on appeal, sued for * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-30557 Document: 00512370077 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/11/2013 No. 13-30557 employment discrimination. Various discovery disputes ensued. The defendants ultimately moved for dismissal for Murungi’s failure to produce documents as ordered or to cooperate with other discovery proceedings, including his deposition. The magistrate judge issued a detailed Report and Recommendation con- cluding that the suit be dismissed with prejudice as authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2)(A)(v). The district court approved the recommenda- tion and dismissed. The magistrate judge convincingly set forth Murungi’s repeated failures and refusals to cooperate in reasonable discovery, both in this proceeding and in others. There is no error in the dismissal under Rule 37. The judgment of dis- missal is AFFIRMED, essentially for the reasons assigned by the magistrate judge. All outstanding motions are denied. 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer