Filed: Aug. 27, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-21026 Conference Calendar DANIEL LOUIS JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus GAYNELLE GRIFFIN JONES, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CV-373 - August 26, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Daniel Louis Johnson, Texas prisoner No. 465571, appeals the dismissal of his petition for a writ of mandamus for fa
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-21026 Conference Calendar DANIEL LOUIS JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus GAYNELLE GRIFFIN JONES, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CV-373 - August 26, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Daniel Louis Johnson, Texas prisoner No. 465571, appeals the dismissal of his petition for a writ of mandamus for fai..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-21026
Conference Calendar
DANIEL LOUIS JOHNSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GAYNELLE GRIFFIN JONES,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-98-CV-373
--------------------
August 26, 1999
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Daniel Louis Johnson, Texas prisoner No. 465571, appeals the
dismissal of his petition for a writ of mandamus for failure to
authorize payment of the filing fee. However, Johnson has failed
to brief any issues related to the district court’s order of
dismissal. Although this court liberally construes the pleadings
of pro se appellants, arguments must still be briefed to be
preserved. Price v. Digital Equip. Corp.,
846 F.2d 1026, 1028
(5th Cir. 1988)(citations omitted). Because Johnson has failed
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 98-21026
-2-
to brief the only issue available to him on appeal, his appeal is
without merit and is frivolous. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d
215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is without
merit, it is dismissed. 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
DISMISSED.