Black v. Wackenhut , 156 F. App'x 722 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                                                        United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                December 13, 2005
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 05-60275
    Summary Calendar
    EDDIE BLACK,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    versus
    WACKENHUT; W.M. WILLIAMS, Warden;
    DR. VIRGINIA VITTOR; MELANIE
    GILLILAND, Head Nurse; GEORGE
    SNYDER, Warden,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Mississippi
    USDC No. 3:03-CV-157
    --------------------
    Before SMITH, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Eddie Black has filed an application for leave to proceed in
    forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal following a summary judgment in
    favor of Dr. Virginia Vittor, which resulted in the dismissal of
    his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit.   By moving for leave to proceed
    IFP, Black is challenging the district court’s certification that
    IFP should not be granted on appeal because his appeal is not
    *
    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    this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-60275
    -2-
    taken in good faith.     See Baugh v. Taylor, 
    117 F.3d 197
    , 202 (5th
    Cir. 1997).
    Black contends that Vittor changed his medication and the
    dosage without first advising him of the alteration.    He has not
    established that Vittor’s actions evinced deliberate indifference
    to his serious medical needs.     See Johnson v. Treen, 
    759 F.2d 1236
    , 1238 (5th Cir. 1985); see also Varnado v. Lynaugh, 
    920 F.2d 320
    , 321 (5th Cir. 1991).    Black also contends that the district
    court erred in not ordering the defendants to answer his
    interrogatories.   He has not established that the district court
    abused its discretion in denying such discovery after the
    magistrate judge had issued his report and recommendation.
    See Moore v. Willis Indep. School Dist., 
    233 F.3d 871
    , 876 (5th
    Cir. 2000).
    Black’s appeal is thus without arguable merit and is
    frivolous.    See Howard v. King, 
    707 F.2d 215
    , 219-20 (5th Cir.
    1983).   Accordingly, we uphold the district court’s order
    certifying that the appeal is not taken in good faith and denying
    Black IFP status on appeal, we deny the motion for leave to
    proceed IFP, and we DISMISS Black’s appeal as frivolous.     See
    
    Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202
    n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
    APPEAL DISMISSED.