Chavanel v. LeBlanc

Fifth Circuit

Chavanel v. LeBlanc

204 F. App'x 380

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 30, 2006

Docket06-30069

StatusUnpublished

This text of 204 F. App'x 380 (Chavanel v. LeBlanc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chavanel v. LeBlanc, 204 F. App'x 380 (5th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Jason Chavanel, Louisiana prisoner # 407939, appeals, pro se, the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure both to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and to exhaust administrative remedies. Although he renews the allegations of his complaint, Chavanel does not challenge the district court’s conclusion that his claims were barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), expiration of the limitations period, failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

By failing to brief any argument challenging the district court’s reasons for dismissal, Chavanel has abandoned those issues. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.1993); Brinkmann v. Dal *381 las County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 818 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987).

Chavanel contends that the district court erred in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over his state-law claims. Because the district court dismissed Chavanel’s federal claims, the dismissal without prejudice of the state-law claims was not an abuse of discretion. E.g., Bass v. Parkwood Hosp., 180 F.3d 234, 246 (5th Cir. 1999).

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under fas limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM: *

Jason Chavanel, Louisiana prisoner # 407939, appeals, pro se, the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure both to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and to exhaust administrative remedies. Although he renews the allegations of his complaint, Chavanel does not challenge the district court’s conclusion that his claims were barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), expiration of the limitations period, failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

By failing to brief any argument challenging the district court’s reasons for dismissal, Chavanel has abandoned those issues. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.1993); Brinkmann v. Dal *381 las County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 818 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987).

Chavanel contends that the district court erred in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over his state-law claims. Because the district court dismissed Chavanel’s federal claims, the dismissal without prejudice of the state-law claims was not an abuse of discretion. E.g., Bass v. Parkwood Hosp., 180 F.3d 234, 246 (5th Cir. 1999).

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under fas limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 F. App'x 380, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chavanel-v-leblanc-ca5-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack