Houston v. Ratnarajah
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-11228 Conference Calendar __________________
MARION HOUSTON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
K. RATNARAJAH, Dr., TDCJ Clements Unit; RICHARDSON, Nurse, TDCJ Clements Unit,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 2:95-CV-179 - - - - - - - - - - April 16, 1996 Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Marion Houston appeals the dismissal of his civil rights
complaint concerning his medical care as frivolous. He argues
that his allegations rise to the level of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983
claim and that the physician testifying at the Spears** hearing
went beyond his role of explaining Houston's medical records and
the significance of the entries. We have carefully reviewed the
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.
Spears v. McCotter, 766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir. 1985). No. 95-11228 -2-
record and Houston's arguments.*** Any improper testimony of the
physician had no effect on the district court's dismissal. For
essentially the same reasons as explained in the magistrate
judge's report, we conclude that the district court did not abuse
its discretion in dismissing Houston's complaint as frivolous.
AFFIRMED.
Houston does not argue on appeal that his work assignment was improper as he did in the district court. That issue is abandoned. See Eason v. Thaler, 14 F.3d 8, 9 n.1 (5th Cir. 1994).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Houston v. Ratnarajah (Houston v. Ratnarajah) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.