De Leon v. San Antonio Indep
This text of De Leon v. San Antonio Indep (De Leon v. San Antonio Indep) 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.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-50334 Summary Calendar __________________
RODOLFO RIVERA MUNOZ,
Appellant,
NEPHTALI DE LEON,
Plaintiff-Appellant, versus
SAN ANTONIO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; VICTOR RODRIGUEZ, Dr., In His Individual and Official Capacity As Superintendent of The San Antonio Independent School District; MARY ESTHER BERNAL, In Her Individual and Official Capacity As Director of Arts and Languages; RAQUEL BEECHNER, In Her Individual and Official Capacity As Curriculum Specialist; THE TEXAS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-94-CV-178 - - - - - - - - - - (August 22, 1995)
Before GARWOOD, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published. No. 95-50334 -2-
IT IS ORDERED that Nephtali De Leon's and Attorney Rodolfo
Munoz's applications for leave to proceed in forma pauperis are
DENIED, because their appeals lack arguable merit and are
therefore frivolous. Despite the appellants' assertions
regarding "a formal policy of genocide against the American
Aborigine by the European Immigrants," the appellants have failed
to show a nonfrivolous appellate issue regarding the district
court's disposition of De Leon's claims regarding his employment
or the district court's imposition of sanctions. See McAfee v.
5th Circuit Judges, 884 F.2d 221, 222 (5th Cir. 1989), cert.
denied, 493 U.S. 1083 (1990). Because the appeals are frivolous,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the appeals are dismissed. See 5th
Cir. R. 42.2; Van Cleave v. United States, 854 F.2d 82, 85 (5th
Cir. 1988).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that De Leon's and Munoz's
applications for preparation of the trial transcript at
government expense are DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
De Leon v. San Antonio Indep, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-leon-v-san-antonio-indep-ca5-1995.