Filed: Nov. 06, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-60051 Conference Calendar JOE L. WARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DAVID ALLEN, Supervisor, Forrest County, Mississippi, in his official capacity, et al., Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 2:94-CV-418-PS - - - - - - - - - - October 23, 1996 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Joe
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-60051 Conference Calendar JOE L. WARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DAVID ALLEN, Supervisor, Forrest County, Mississippi, in his official capacity, et al., Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 2:94-CV-418-PS - - - - - - - - - - October 23, 1996 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Joe L..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-60051
Conference Calendar
JOE L. WARD,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DAVID ALLEN, Supervisor,
Forrest County, Mississippi,
in his official capacity, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 2:94-CV-418-PS
- - - - - - - - - -
October 23, 1996
Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Joe L. Ward has appealed the district court’s grant of
summary judgment, dismissing his action alleging failure to
provide him adequate medical attention when he was confined in
the Forrest County Jail. As defendants, Ward named the members
of the county board of supervisors and the former sheriff. These
defendants-appellees may not be held liable under 42 U.S.C.
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 96-60051
- 2 -
§ 1983 on a theory of respondeat superior; and there is no
evidence that they knew of Ward’s medical needs or intended that
he be denied medical attention. See Thompkins v. Belt,
828 F.2d
298, 303-05 (5th Cir. 1987). Ward does not now argue otherwise.
See Al-Ra’id v. Ingle,
69 F.3d 28, 33 (5th Cir. 1995).
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.