MS Life Insurance Co. v. Donna J. Barfield , 203 F. App'x 306 ( 2006 )

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
OCTOBER 31, 2006
No. 06-10565
THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar
CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 03-01065-CV-J-12-TEM
MS LIFE INSURANCE CO.,
Plaintiff-Counter-
Defendant-Appellee,
versus
DONNA J. BARFIELD,
Defendant-Counter-
Claimant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
(October 31, 2006)
Before DUBINA, BLACK and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
In her notice of appeal, appellant Donna Barfield (“Barfield”) appeals the
district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of MS Life Insurance
Company (“MS”), and third party-defendant Buddy Hutchinson, Inc., and that
portion of the district court’s order which denied Barfield’s motion for
continuance and for leave to amend.
We first observe, after reading Barfield’s amended initial brief, that she fails
to address the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of MS. Issues
not argued on appeal are deemed waived. See United States v. Curtis, 380 F.3d
1308, 1310 (11th Cir. 2004) (discussing long-standing rule in this circuit that
issues not raised in a party’s initial brief on appeal are deemed waived), cert.
denied, 126 S. Ct. 418 (2005).
We review a district court’s denial of trial continuances for abuse of
discretion. United States v. Bowe, 221 F.3d 1183, 1189 (11th Cir. 2000). We also
review a district court’s denial of a motion for leave to amend a complaint for an
abuse of discretion. Carruthers v. BSA Advertising, Inc., 357 F.3d 1213, 1217-18
(11th Cir. 2004).
Assuming we have jurisdiction over the district court’s order filed on
October 18, 2005, which denied Barfield’s motion to continue and motion for
2
leave to amend, we affirm that order because we conclude from the record that the
district court did not abuse its discretion in its rulings.
AFFIRMED.
3