Clay v. University of Texas Medical Branch at John Sealy

Fifth Circuit

Clay v. University of Texas Medical Branch at John Sealy

155 F. App'x 787

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 28, 2005

Docket04-41134

StatusUnpublished

This text of 155 F. App'x 787 (Clay v. University of Texas Medical Branch at John Sealy) 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

Clay v. University of Texas Medical Branch at John Sealy, 155 F. App'x 787 (5th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Thomas H. Clay, Texas prisoner # 1124123, appeals the magistrate judge’s denial of his motion for appointment of counsel. This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction on its own motion if necessary. 1 Although an interlocutory order denying the appointment of counsel in a civil rights action is immediately appeal-able, 2 if that order was issued by a magistrate judge and the parties have not consented to proceed before a magistrate judge, the party must appeal first to the district court. 3 Otherwise, this court lacks jurisdiction. 4

The record does not indicate that the parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge or that Clay appealed the denial of his motion to the district court. Therefore, we DISMISS Clay’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

1

. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987).

2

. Robbins v. Maggio, 750 F.2d 405, 413 (5th Cir. 1985).

3

. 28U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A),(c)(1),(c)(3); see Alpine View Co. v. Atlas Copco AB, 205 F.3d 208, 219-20 (5th Cir.2000).

4

. Colburn v. Bunge Towing, Inc., 883 F.2d 372, 379 (5th Cir.1989).

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

PER CURIAM: *

Thomas H. Clay, Texas prisoner # 1124123, appeals the magistrate judge’s denial of his motion for appointment of counsel. This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction on its own motion if necessary. 1 Although an interlocutory order denying the appointment of counsel in a civil rights action is immediately appeal-able, 2 if that order was issued by a magistrate judge and the parties have not consented to proceed before a magistrate judge, the party must appeal first to the district court. 3 Otherwise, this court lacks jurisdiction. 4

The record does not indicate that the parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge or that Clay appealed the denial of his motion to the district court. Therefore, we DISMISS Clay’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

*

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.

1

. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987).

2

. Robbins v. Maggio, 750 F.2d 405, 413 (5th Cir. 1985).

3

. 28U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A),(c)(1),(c)(3); see Alpine View Co. v. Atlas Copco AB, 205 F.3d 208, 219-20 (5th Cir.2000).

4

. Colburn v. Bunge Towing, Inc., 883 F.2d 372, 379 (5th Cir.1989).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 F. App'x 787, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clay-v-university-of-texas-medical-branch-at-john-sealy-ca5-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack