Filed: Apr. 23, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-10954 (Summary Calendar) BOBBY LEE COLEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus MOORE, Officer, Dallas County Jail, Defendant, and UNKNOWN NAMED DEFENDANTS DALLAS COUNTY JAIL; V. L. SPARKS, Dallas City Police Detective, Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (USDC No. 3:93-CV-63-P) - - - - - - - - - - April 9, 1996 Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 95-10954 (Summary Calendar) BOBBY LEE COLEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus MOORE, Officer, Dallas County Jail, Defendant, and UNKNOWN NAMED DEFENDANTS DALLAS COUNTY JAIL; V. L. SPARKS, Dallas City Police Detective, Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (USDC No. 3:93-CV-63-P) - - - - - - - - - - April 9, 1996 Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-10954
(Summary Calendar)
BOBBY LEE COLEMAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
MOORE, Officer, Dallas County Jail,
Defendant,
and
UNKNOWN NAMED DEFENDANTS DALLAS
COUNTY JAIL; V. L. SPARKS,
Dallas City Police Detective,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
(USDC No. 3:93-CV-63-P)
- - - - - - - - - -
April 9, 1996
Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Plaintiff-Appellant Bobby Lee Coleman appeals the district
court’s summary judgment for Defendant-Appellee V. L. Sparks in
Coleman’s civil rights suit. Even giving Coleman’s brief liberal
construction, we view his arguments as failing to raise any
challenge to the dismissal of the suit as to the unserved and
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
unidentified defendants. Thus, any such challenge is deemed
abandoned on appeal. See Eason v. Thaler,
14 F.3d 8, 9 n.1 (5th
Cir. 1994).
Coleman’s arguments challenge the district court’s conclusion
that he failed to allege specifically such violations of his
constitutional rights that would overcome Sparks’ entitlement to
qualified immunity. We have carefully reviewed the record and the
appellate arguments; and we detect no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Coleman v. Sparks, No. 3:CV-93-0063-P(N.D. Tex. July 5,
1995).
AFFIRMED.
2