Lann v. Maxwell

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
April 1, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-40770
Summary Calendar
SIE JOE LANN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JAMES MAXWELL,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. L-01-CV-28
--------------------
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Sie Joe Lann filed a notice of appeal following the dismissal,
for lack of federal jurisdiction, of his action against a court
reporter for allegedly breaching a contract to provide various
transcripts related to Lann’s second-degree murder trial and
conviction. Lann’s styled his action as one brought pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Because the district court did not enter a judgment on a
separate document as required by FED. R. CIV. P. 58, Lann’s notice

-- 1 of 2 --

2
of appeal, filed more than two months after the district court
signed the order dismissing the action, is timely as to that order.
See FED. R. CIV. P. 58(b)(2).
Lann’s pleadings and exhibits reveal that his complaint did
not allege a constitutional violation or otherwise establish a
federal question that would confer federal jurisdiction on the
district court under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. See Rheuark v. Shaw, 628
F.2d 297, 302-03 (5th Cir. 1980). The district court’s judgment is
AFFIRMED.
Lann’s motion to amend the record is DENIED.
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --