Filed: Dec. 09, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-10210 Summary Calendar KURT CHARLES GARRISON ET AL., Plaintiff, KURT CHARLES GARRISON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus WICHITA FALLS TX. CITY OF; JACK SCHLIEPER, Individually and in his official capacity as Chief of Police; DAVID BYNUM, Individually and in his official capacity as Policeman, Defendants-Appellees. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 7:97-CV-213-X - December 7, 199
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-10210 Summary Calendar KURT CHARLES GARRISON ET AL., Plaintiff, KURT CHARLES GARRISON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus WICHITA FALLS TX. CITY OF; JACK SCHLIEPER, Individually and in his official capacity as Chief of Police; DAVID BYNUM, Individually and in his official capacity as Policeman, Defendants-Appellees. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 7:97-CV-213-X - December 7, 1999..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-10210
Summary Calendar
KURT CHARLES GARRISON ET AL.,
Plaintiff,
KURT CHARLES GARRISON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
WICHITA FALLS TX. CITY OF; JACK SCHLIEPER,
Individually and in his official capacity as
Chief of Police; DAVID BYNUM, Individually and
in his official capacity as Policeman,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 7:97-CV-213-X
--------------------
December 7, 1999
Before KING, Chief Judge, JOLLY, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kurt Charles Garrison appeals the district court’s dismissal
of his pro se civil rights complaint wherein he argued that the
issuance of a speeding ticket to his wife resulted in a violation
of several constitutional rights. Assuming, arguendo, that
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 99-10210
-2-
Garrison has standing to bring this appeal, we find it
frivolous.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying
Garrison leave to amend the complaint. See Ashe v. Corley,
992
F.2d 540, 542 (5th Cir. 1993). Nor did the court err by
dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim without a
trial by jury. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).
The appeal is without arguable merit and thus is DISMISSED.
See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2; Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir.
1983). All outstanding motions are DENIED. In addition, we
impose upon Garrison a monetary sanction of $100 based on the
lack of respect for this Court evinced in the motion to recuse
various Judges of this Court. The Clerk of this Court shall
accept no further filings from Garrison until the $100 sanction
is paid.
APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTIONS DENIED; SANCTION IMPOSED.