Filed: Apr. 24, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 96-31184 Conference Calendar _ ADAIR D. JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus LOUISIANA STATE BAR ASSN. ET AL., Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 96-CV-3463 - - - - - - - - - - April 15, 1997 Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Adair D. Jones appeals the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights actio
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 96-31184 Conference Calendar _ ADAIR D. JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus LOUISIANA STATE BAR ASSN. ET AL., Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 96-CV-3463 - - - - - - - - - - April 15, 1997 Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Adair D. Jones appeals the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights action..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 96-31184
Conference Calendar
__________________
ADAIR D. JONES,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
LOUISIANA STATE BAR ASSN. ET AL.,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 96-CV-3463
- - - - - - - - - -
April 15, 1997
Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Adair D. Jones appeals the district court’s dismissal of his
civil rights action as frivolous under the doctrine of res
judicata. We have carefully reviewed the record and Jones’s
brief and hold, essentially for reasons stated by the magistrate
judge, that the district court did not abuse its discretion in
dismissing the complaint as frivolous. See Jones v. Louisiana
State Bar Assn. et al, No. 96-3463-B-M2 (M.D. La. Sept. 26, 1996)
(unpublished); see also Graves v. Hampton,
1 F.3d 315, 319 (5th
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 96-30236
-2-
Cir. 1993); Wilson v. Lynaugh,
878 F.2d 846, 850 (5th Cir. 1989).
The district court’s judgment is
AFFIRMED.