Williams v. Morton Police Dept ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    No. 06-60975                        F I L E D
    Summary Calendar                     September 4, 2007
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    DONNIE ANGELO WILLIAMS                                                  Clerk
    Plaintiff-Appellant
    v.
    WILLIE ANDERSON, of the Morton Police Department;
    WILLIAM RICHARDSON, Sheriff of Scott County
    Defendants-Appellees
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Mississippi
    USDC No. 3:05-CV-269
    Before WIENER, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Donnie Angelo Williams appeals the district court’s dismissal of his
    lawsuit raising claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for false arrest and deprivation
    of liberty.
    Williams contends that the district court erred in dismissing his false
    arrest claim on the grounds of res judicata. We review this claim de novo. See
    United States v. Davenport, 
    484 F.3d 321
    , 326 (5th Cir. 2007). Williams has 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    should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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. 06-60975
    established that the district court erred in dismissing this claim on res judicata
    grounds, in light of his 2003 civil action raising claims under § 1983 that arose
    out of the same nucleus of operative facts. 
    Id. Williams further
    contends that the district court erred in granting
    summary judgment on his deprivation of liberty claim. This court reviews the
    grant of a motion for summary judgment de novo. Hart v. Hairston, 
    343 F.3d 762
    , 764 (5th Cir. 2003). Summary judgment is appropriate where, considering
    all of the allegations in the pleadings, depositions, admissions, answers to
    interrogatories, and affidavits, and drawing inferences in the light most
    favorable to the nonmoving party, there is no genuine issue of material fact and
    the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.   FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c);
    Little v. Liquid Air Corp., 
    37 F.3d 1069
    , 1075 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc). If the
    moving party meets his burden of showing that no genuine issue exists, the
    burden shifts back to the nonmoving party to produce evidence or set forth
    specific facts showing the existence of a genuine issue for trial. Celotex Corp. v.
    Catrett, 
    477 U.S. 317
    , 324 (1986).
    Williams has not shown that a disputed issue of material fact exists
    relative to his claim that he was unconstitutionally deprived of his liberty after
    he could not post bond and was held in jail. Accordingly, summary judgment on
    that claim was properly granted.
    The judgment of the district court is thus AFFIRMED.
    2