Filed: Jun. 04, 2007
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 4, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-20719 Summary Calendar EMILY DEMMLER, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL, Defendants, C.O. BRADFORD, Chief, Defendant-Appellant. No. 05-20720 WILLIAM THOMAS GILMORE, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL, Defendants, CHIEF C.O. BRADFORD, Defendant-Appellant. No. 05-20719 -2- No. 05-20724 BRANDI RATLIFF; W
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 4, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-20719 Summary Calendar EMILY DEMMLER, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL, Defendants, C.O. BRADFORD, Chief, Defendant-Appellant. No. 05-20720 WILLIAM THOMAS GILMORE, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL, Defendants, CHIEF C.O. BRADFORD, Defendant-Appellant. No. 05-20719 -2- No. 05-20724 BRANDI RATLIFF; WI..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 4, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-20719
Summary Calendar
EMILY DEMMLER,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL,
Defendants,
C.O. BRADFORD, Chief,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20720
WILLIAM THOMAS GILMORE,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL,
Defendants,
CHIEF C.O. BRADFORD,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20719
-2-
No. 05-20724
BRANDI RATLIFF; WILLIAM RYAN GRENWELGE,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
versus
CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL,
Defendants,
C.O. BRADFORD,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20725
EDGAR COELLO; MONICA COELLO ASHFORD; ELIZABETH ANN GURSKE;
JESSICA COELLO GUILLEM; INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF
ISABELLA GUILLEM, A MINOR,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
versus
CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL,
Defendants,
CHIEF C.O. BRADFORD, in his capacity as chief of police of the
Houston Police Department,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20719
-3-
No. 05-20729
LESLIE RICHIE,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL,
Defendants,
C.O. BRADFORD, Chief,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20743
SARAH SPONSEL,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL,
Defendants,
CHIEF C.O. BRADFORD,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20719
-4-
No. 05-20744
ROLAND T. ROSS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND FOR RAMOND ROSS,
AND ROSHANDA ROSS, MINOR CHILD, RAMOND ROSS, MINOR; ROSHANDA
ROSS,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
versus
CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL,
Defendants,
C.O. BRADFORD, Chief, in his capacity as chief of police of the
Houston Police Department,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20756
CHAD CORY; ADAM ADAMS; ELEAZAR AGUILAR; LUIS AGUILAR; FELIX
ALIPIO, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
versus
CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL,
Defendants,
CHIEF OF POLICE C.O. BRADFORD,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20719
-5-
No. 05-20752
CORI LOPEZ; MICHAEL GUERRA; RASHAAN HARRIS; DONNY ITTY; CHARLES
KELL, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
versus
CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL,
Defendants,
C.O. BRADFORD, Chief, in his capacity as chief of police of the
Houston Police Department,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:04-CV-1543
--------------------
Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appellant C.O. Bradford, former Chief of the Houston Police
Department, has filed interlocutory appeals of the orders denying
summary judgment on his qualified immunity defense in a number of
cases filed against him stemming from a sting operation targeting
illegal street racing. A district court’s decision to deny
*
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. 05-20719
-6-
qualified immunity on a motion for summary judgment is only
immediately appealable if it turns on an issue of law, and is not
appealable if it is based on a claim regarding the sufficiency of
the evidence. Gobert v. Caldwell,
463 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir.
2006). Bradford disputes only the factual determinations of the
district court and whether the evidence was sufficient to proceed.
We therefore lack jurisdiction to hear this interlocutory appeal,
id., and DISMISS THE APPEAL for lack of jurisdiction.