Filed: Jul. 09, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-10043 Conference Calendar EUGENE IVORY HENTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DENNISE FREDERICK, Classification Officer Tarrant County Sheriff's Department, Defendant-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:95-CV-239-A - - - - - - - - - - June 26, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Eugene Ivory Henton, (#018
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-10043 Conference Calendar EUGENE IVORY HENTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DENNISE FREDERICK, Classification Officer Tarrant County Sheriff's Department, Defendant-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:95-CV-239-A - - - - - - - - - - June 26, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Eugene Ivory Henton, (#0180..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-10043
Conference Calendar
EUGENE IVORY HENTON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DENNISE FREDERICK, Classification Officer
Tarrant County Sheriff's Department,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:95-CV-239-A
- - - - - - - - - -
June 26, 1996
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Eugene Ivory Henton, (#0180336), argues that the summary
judgment for the defendant was improper and that the district
court should not have denied a motion for continuance, construed
as a motion brought pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). Henton
noticed an appeal from the denial of the motion but not from the
summary judgment.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
96-10043
-2-
Henton may not now challenge the summary judgment because
the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion does not bring up the
underlying judgment for review. In re Ta Chi Navigation (Panama)
Corp. S.A.,
728 F.2d 699, 703 (5th Cir. 1984). As to the denial
of his Rule 60(b) motion, we have reviewed the record and
Henton's brief and AFFIRM the district court's denial for
essentially the same reasons set forth by the district court.
Henton v. Frederick, No. 4:95-CV-239-A (N.D. Tex. Jan. 4, 1996).
Henton's motion to amend his complaint is denied.
AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.