Law v. Johnson, et al

03-60551Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit24 oct. 2003

Texte intégral

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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
October 24, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-60551
Summary Calendar
LEON W. LAW,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
ROBERT JOHNSON, COMMISSIONER, MISSISSIPPI
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; LAWRENCE KELLY,
Superintendent, CMCF; ROBERT CULPEPPER, Director
of Medical Services; DAVID CARLSON, Attending
Physician; AHMED ZEIN, Attending Physician,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 3:02-CV-411-BN
--------------------
Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Leon W. Law, Mississippi state prisoner # 088550, has filed
a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal
following the magistrate judge’s entry of an Agreed Judgment and
the voluntary dismissal with prejudice of all remaining 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 claims against the defendants.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 03-60551
-2-
By moving for IFP status, Law is challenging the district
court’s certification that IFP status should not be granted on
appeal because his appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh
v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).
Law has failed to show that his appeal from the Agreed
Judgment was taken in good faith. As the Agreed Judgment simply
reflects the agreement of the parties, there was no ruling by he
magistrate judge from which to appeal. Nor has Law filed a
timely notice of appeal from any of the magistrate judge’s
rulings as they pertain to Law’s attempts to enforce the Agreed
Judgment. His request for IFP status is DENIED. See Baugh, 117
F.3d at 202. Furthermore, because the appeal is frivolous, it is
DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Law’s motions for the production of documents and for the
appointment of counsel are also DENIED.
MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.