Davis v. Klevenhagen ( 1996 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-20552
Conference Calendar
__________________
CARL W. DAVIS, CHARLES J.
CHANNELL, CLIFFORD RICE,
ROBERT LAND, MICHAEL D.
MILLER, ROBERT G. WHITE, MICHAEL
BRYANT, GREGORY THARP, JOHN NEWELL,
Plaintiffs,
MICHAEL CAIN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JOHNNY KLEVENHAGEN, Sheriff, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. CA-H-94-1302
- - - - - - - - - -
February 29 1996
Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Michael Cain appeals from the district court's judgment
dismissing his civil rights action with prejudice pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(d). Cain argues that the district court erred in
dismissing the complaint without giving him an opportunity to
plead his best case. We have reviewed the record and 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 95-20552
-2-
district court's opinion and find no reversible error. A
separate suit by individuals for equitable relief is disallowed
to avoid interference with the orderly administration of the
class action. See Gillespie v. Crawford, 858 F.2d 1101, 1103
(5th Cir. 1988) (en banc). Moreover, supervisory officials are
not liable for the actions of subordinates on a theory of
vicarious liability or respondeat superior. See Thompkins v.
Belt, 828 F.2d 298, 303 (5th Cir. 1987).
On appeal, Cain can present no legal points arguable on
their merits, and the appeal is frivolous. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is
frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. Rule 42.2. The motions
to amend the complaint, for appointment of counsel, and for an
extension of time to file a brief are DENIED. We caution Cain
that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him will invite
the imposition of sanction. To avoid sanctions, Cain is further
cautioned to review any pending appeals to ensure that they do
not raise arguments that are frivolous because they have been
previously decided by this court.
APPEAL DISMISSED.