William Oliver v. Bankfirst
Filing
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-60161 Affirmed ] Judge: WED , Judge: LHS , Judge: SAH Mandate pull date is 02/06/2014 [13-60161]
Case: 13-60161
Document: 00512503248
Page: 1
Date Filed: 01/16/2014
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 13-60161
Summary Calendar
January 16, 2014
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
WILLIAM H. OLIVER,
Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee,
v.
BANKFIRST,
Defendant-Appellee,
BILL SKINNER,
Defendant-Appellee, CrossAppellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 4:09-CV-29
Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Pro se plaintiff William H. Oliver appeals from the dismissal, much
earlier in this proceeding, of all his claims relating to the defendants’ actions
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
*
Case: 13-60161
Document: 00512503248
Page: 2
Date Filed: 01/16/2014
No. 13-60161
concerning Oliver’s former property following a foreclosure sale.
Oliver’s
brief, such as it is, consists of a short series of conclusory statements without
any legal or factual analysis.
“Failure to provide any legal or factual analysis
of an issue results in waiver.” 1 While we construe pro se briefs liberally, pro
se plaintiffs are still required to adequately brief issues for review.
2
Accordingly, we dismiss Oliver’s appeal.
Defendant-appellee and cross-appellant Bill Skinner appeals from the
district court’s judgment, following a bench trial, dismissing Skinner’s
counterclaims, including abuse of process, attorney’s fees, costs, sanctions, and
injunctive relief.
As Skinner concedes in his brief, our review on these issues
is for abuse of discretion, and our review of the facts is limited to clear error. 3
We find no abuse of discretion or clear error in any part of the district court’s
We specifically note that the district
order supporting its final judgment. 4
court granted Skinner’s motion for Rule 11 sanctions and imposed sanctions in
the amount of $250 against Oliver. 5 We will not upset this award.
Accordingly, we affirm the final judgment of the district court.
1
American States Ins. Co. v. Bailey, 133 F.3d 363, 372 (5th Cir. 1998).
2
See Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995).
3
See United States v. Mississippi, 921 F.2d 604, 609 (5th Cir. 1991).
See Oliver v. Skinner, No. 4:09-CV-29-CWR-LRA, 2013 WL 667664 (S.D. Miss. Feb.
22, 2013).
4
5
Id.
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?