Rogers v. Metropolitan Transit Authority Metrolift
This text of 111 F. App'x 782 (Rogers v. Metropolitan Transit Authority Metrolift) 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
Floyd Thomas Rogers and Dykeba Lecole Rogers seek leave to proceed in for-ma pauperis (IFP) in the appeal of the dismissal of their suit for want of prosecution. IT IS ORDERED that their motion for leave to proceed IFP is GRANTED.
The parties have fully briefed this case. The plaintiffs fail, however, to demonstrate that the district court abused its discretion when it dismissed their case for want of prosecution. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); Al-Ra‘id v. Ingle, 69 F.3d 28, 33 (5th Cir.1995); Gonzalez v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 610 F.2d 241, 247 (5th Cir.1980). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
111 F. App'x 782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-metropolitan-transit-authority-metrolift-ca5-2004.