Joiner v. Bennett
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-20607 Summary Calendar
ZARAIL JOINER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
BENNETT, Officer
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H:97-CV-3073 - - - - - - - - - -
February 12, 1999
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Zarail Joiner appeals the district court’s dismissal of his
42 U.S.C. § 1983 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
Joiner argues that the district court erred denying his discovery
request and not allowing him to file objections to the magistrate
judge’s recommendation and report. These arguments are not
supported by the record. Joiner also argues that since he signed
a consent form to proceed before a magistrate judge pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 636(c), a magistrate judge, rather than the district
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 98-20607 -2-
court should have rendered the decision in his case. Although
Joiner did file a consent form prior to his case being
transferred to the U.S District Court for the Southern District
of Texas, he did not sign a consent form after his case was
transferred; therefore, Joiner did not have a right to proceed
before a magistrate judge.
Joiner does not address the district court’s reason for
dismissing his claim. Therefore, he has abandoned this issue on
appeal. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813
F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Joiner v. Bennett (Joiner v. Bennett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.