Cornia v. University of Texas Medical Branch

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 15, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 07-10222
Summary Calendar
GEORGE CORNIA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BRANCH/DALLAS COUNTY JAIL; CTMB;
DALLAS COUNTY JAIL, Medical Records,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:06-CV-1216
--------------------
Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
George Cornia, Texas prisoner # 1235882, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his civil right complaint, in which
he claimed, inter alia, that he was improperly administered
Dilantin, an anti-seizure medication. The district court
summarily dismissed the civil rights claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and construed the remaining portion of the
complaint as an application for a writ of habeas corpus, which it
dismissed on limitation grounds. The district court determined
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 07-10222
-2-
that Cornia’s complaint that he was improperly administrated
Dilantin was time barred by the applicable limitations period.
On appeal, Cornia argues that his claim regarding the
Dilantin was timely or, in the alternative, that the statute of
limitations should be tolled in his favor so as to render his
claim timely. Cornia also asserts that his habeas corpus
petition was timely filed. Cornia, however, has not briefed that
claim, and it is deemed waived. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222,
224-25 (5th Cir. 1993)
We review the dismissal de novo. Geiger v. Jowers, 404 F.3d
371, 373 (5th Cir. 2005). Cornia’s complaint was not filed
within two years of the date that he learned that he had been
improperly given Dilantin, and it is therefore untimely. See
Owens v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235, 249-50 (1989); Piotrowski v. City
of Houston, 51 F.3d 512, 516 (5th Cir. 1995); TEX. CIV. PRAC. AND
REM. CODE § 16.003(a). Cornia is not entitled to equitable
tolling of the limitations period. See Fisher v. Johnson, 174
F.3d 710, 715-16 (5th Cir. 1999); Helton v. Clements, 832 F.2d
332, 336 (5th Cir. 1987).
AFFIRMED.