Hernandez v. Grubbs

82 F. App'x 866
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedDecember 8, 2003
Docket03-30746
StatusUnpublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 82 F. App'x 866 (Hernandez v. Grubbs) 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
Hernandez v. Grubbs, 82 F. App'x 866 (5th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

PER CURIAM *

Juanita Perez Hernandez and Daniel Montes, Jr. (collectively, Appellants), have appealed, pro se, the district court’s summary-judgment dismissal of their civil rights lawsuit. The Appellants acknowledge that the district court correctly held that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 does not provide a jurisdictional basis for their claims, but they argue that they should have been given an opportunity to amend their complaint to state a valid cause of action. They further argue that the entry of summary judgment was error because of the existence of unidentified genuine issues of material fact relative to the validity of their claims.

*867 Although this court applies less stringent standards to parties proceeding pro se than to litigants, pro se parties must still brief the issues and reasonably comply with the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 28. Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir.1995). The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure require the parties to provide references to the page number of the record to support statements of fact. Fed. R.App. P. 28(a)(7) and (9)(A) (2002); 5th Cir. R. 28.2.3; Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224 (5th Cir.1993). As the Appellants have failed to comply with these requirements, we do not consider their arguments. The appeal is frivolous, and it is dismissed. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.

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

Related

Dawn Bailey v. US Bank, National Association
620 F. App'x 361 (Fifth Circuit, 2015)
Cuellar v. Keppel Amfels, L.L.C.
731 F.3d 342 (Fifth Circuit, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
82 F. App'x 866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hernandez-v-grubbs-ca5-2003.