Samuel Ashley, Jr. v. USA
Filing
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-11597 Affirmed] Judge: EHJ, Judge: JLW, Judge: EBC. Mandate pull date is 05/22/2017 [16-11597]
Case: 16-11597
Document: 00513933866
Page: 1
Date Filed: 03/30/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-11597
Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
March 30, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
SAMUEL ALVIN ASHLEY, JR.,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant-Appellee
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:14-CV-2654
Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Plaintiff-Appellant Samuel Alvin Ashley, Jr. sued the United States of
America (the “government”) under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) for
injuries allegedly resulting from the actions or inactions of non-professional
personnel occurring while he was a prisoner in the Federal Correctional
Institution at Seagoville, Texas. His complaint boils down to an assertion
under the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution for cruel and
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-11597
Document: 00513933866
Page: 2
Date Filed: 03/30/2017
No. 16-11597
unusual punishment, a late classification of his action which started as a Texas
personal injury claim. In its lengthy and detailed analysis of the jurisdictional
implication of Ashley’s action, the district court concluded that the government
correctly relied on the discretionary-function exception to the FTCA, refutation
of which was Ashley’s burden to bear.
For essentially the same reasons given by the district court, we affirm
its grant of the government’s motion to dismiss without prejudice for lack of
jurisdiction.
AFFIRMED.
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?