Filed: Mar. 07, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-10635 Conference Calendar _ DON VENABLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, and RICHARD FINLAN, Plaintiff, versus ROBERT L. JOHNSTON, DENNIS J. EICHELBAUM, SCHWARTZ & EICHELBAUM, PC Defendants - Appellees, and DAVID STROBEL Defendant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the ern District of USDC No. 3:94-CV-2294-H - - - - - - - - - - February 29, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-10635 Conference Calendar _ DON VENABLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, and RICHARD FINLAN, Plaintiff, versus ROBERT L. JOHNSTON, DENNIS J. EICHELBAUM, SCHWARTZ & EICHELBAUM, PC Defendants - Appellees, and DAVID STROBEL Defendant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the ern District of USDC No. 3:94-CV-2294-H - - - - - - - - - - February 29, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-10635
Conference Calendar
__________________
DON VENABLE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
and
RICHARD FINLAN,
Plaintiff,
versus
ROBERT L. JOHNSTON, DENNIS J.
EICHELBAUM, SCHWARTZ & EICHELBAUM,
PC
Defendants - Appellees,
and
DAVID STROBEL
Defendant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the ern District of
USDC No. 3:94-CV-2294-H
- - - - - - - - - -
February 29, 1996
Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Don Venable appeals from summary judgment in favor of the
defendants in a civil rights action. He argues that he was
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 95-10635
-2-
deprived of his First Amendment right of "access to information."
We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and
find no reversible error. The appeal is without arguable merit
and thus frivolous. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 219-20
(5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is
DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
APPEAL DISMISSED.