Summary
George Jarrett appealed the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint and state law breach of contract claim. The Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding that Jarrett waived any challenge to the district court's statute of limitations bar and its decision to decline supplemental jurisdiction by failing to argue those issues on appeal. The appeal was dismissed as frivolous.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Jarrett waived his challenges to the district court's dismissal by failing to address the time bar and supplemental jurisdiction rulings in his appellate brief.
Holdings
- By failing to challenge the district court's time bar ruling and supplemental jurisdiction decision in his appellate brief, Jarrett waived those issues.
Key quotations
“Jarrett's brief argues the merits of his claims but does not challenge the district court's time bar ruling or its decision not to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the contract claim. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). Thus, Jarrett has waived any challenge to the district court's dispositive ruling. See Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). We dismiss the appeal as frivolous.” (2)
Factual background
Jarrett filed a § 1983 civil rights complaint and a state law breach of contract claim. The district court dismissed the § 1983 claim as barred by the Louisiana statute of limitations and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the contract claim. Jarrett appealed, but his brief only argued the merits of his claims and did not challenge the district court's dispositive rulings.
Procedural history
The district court dismissed the § 1983 claim as barred by the Louisiana statute of limitations and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the breach of contract claim.