Filed: Sep. 18, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 02-30212 Summary Calendar RICKEY EVANS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus BRYAN READY; E. BOUDREAUX; JOSEPH M. TURNER; D. BORDELON; RONNIE JETT, Defendants-Appellees. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 99-CV-1032-B - September 17, 2002 Before GARWOOD, JOLLY and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Rickey Evans, Louisiana prisoner # 108026, appeals the district court’s dismissal of h
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 02-30212 Summary Calendar RICKEY EVANS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus BRYAN READY; E. BOUDREAUX; JOSEPH M. TURNER; D. BORDELON; RONNIE JETT, Defendants-Appellees. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 99-CV-1032-B - September 17, 2002 Before GARWOOD, JOLLY and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Rickey Evans, Louisiana prisoner # 108026, appeals the district court’s dismissal of hi..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-30212
Summary Calendar
RICKEY EVANS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
BRYAN READY; E. BOUDREAUX; JOSEPH M. TURNER; D. BORDELON;
RONNIE JETT,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 99-CV-1032-B
--------------------
September 17, 2002
Before GARWOOD, JOLLY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Rickey Evans, Louisiana prisoner # 108026, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint.
Evans argues that the district court erred in granting summary
judgment in favor of defendant Sergeant Bryan Ready on Evans’s
claims of deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs
and retaliation. Evans has failed to show that he stated a claim
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
2
for deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. See
Estelle v. Gamble,
429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976). With regard to the
retaliation claim, Evans’s conclusional allegations are
insufficient to meet his summary judgment burden. See Little v.
Liquid Air Corp.,
37 F.3d 1069, 1075 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc).
Evans also argues that the district court erred in
dismissing his complaint against all of the other defendants for
failure to state a claim. Because he did not allege any personal
involvement by these defendants in the withholding of his
medications, Evans failed to state a claim for deliberate
indifference to serious medical needs against these defendants.
See Lozano v. Smith,
718 F.2d 756, 768 (5th Cir. 1983). At most,
Evans’s allegations against these defendants stated a claim of
negligence, which is insufficient to state a claim under 42
U.S.C. § 1983. See Varnado v. Lynaugh,
920 F.2d 320, 321 (5th
Cir. 1991).
Evans has failed to present any argument as to the propriety
of the district court’s denial of his postjudgment motion. Thus
that issue has been abandoned. Yohey v. Collins,
985 F.2d 222,
224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).
AFFIRMED.
3