Arredondo v. Swart

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-11211
Conference Calendar
FIDENCIO ARREDONDO,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
WILLIAM SWART, Doctor; Et Al.,
Defendants,
WILLIAM SWART, Doctor,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:99-CV-139
--------------------
June 18, 2002
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Fidencio Arredondo (“Arredondo”), Texas state prisoner
#761272, appeals the jury verdict in favor of Dr. William Swart
(“Swart”) in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action where he
alleged that Swart was deliberately indifferent to his medical
needs. Arredondo argues that the jury’s verdict was unsupported

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 01-11211
-2-
by the evidence. When an appellant challenges the sufficiency of
evidence presented at trial but does not raise a FED. R. CIV.
P. 50(a) motion before the case is submitted to the jury, this
court reviews for plain error. See United States ex rel. Wallace
v. Flintco, Inc., 143 F.3d 955, 960 (5th Cir. 1998).
Swart testified that he treated Arredondo for various
medical conditions, and he stated that once Arredondo’s work
restrictions were lifted, Arredondo did not request that Swart
request further work restrictions. Accordingly, there was
evidence to support the jury verdict. See Flintco, 143 F.3d at
964; see also Hiller v. Mfrs. Prod. Research Group of North Am.,
Inc., 59 F.3d 1514, 1522 (5th Cir. 1995).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --