Clovis Prince v. Michelle Chow, et al


UNPUBLISHED OPINION ORDER FILED. [16-41158 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: EGJ, Judge: JES, Judge: CH. Mandate pull date is 08/25/2017; denying as unnecessary motion to dismiss appeal filed by Appellees Mr. Wayne Stone and Mr. Matthew M. Ryan [8324465-3]; denying motion to proceed IFP filed by Appellant Mr. Clovis Prince [8321725-2]; denying motion to dismiss appeal without prejudice filed by Appellant Mr. Clovis Prince [8321725-3] [16-41158]

Download PDF
Case: 16-41158 Document: 00514103404 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/04/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 16-41158 FILED August 4, 2017 In the Matter of: CLOVIS PRINCE, Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Debtor CLOVIS PRINCE, Appellant v. MICHELLE CHOW; WAYNE STONE; LARRY ALAN LEVICK; TODD ALAN HOODENPYLE; MATTHEW M. RYAN, Appellees ______________________________________________ CLOVIS PRINCE Appellant v. MICHELLE H. CHOW, Trustee; WAYNE STONE; MATTHEW M. RYAN, Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:15-CV-417 USDC No. 4:16-CV-30 Before JOLLY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. Case: 16-41158 Document: 00514103404 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/04/2017 No. 16-41158 PER CURIAM: * Clovis Prince moves to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the district court’s dismissal of his consolidated appeals from the bankruptcy court’s orders of dismissal entered in two adversary proceedings. He is challenging the district court’s certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Prince’s conclusional assertions of error by the district court, without citation to the record or cogent legal argument, do not show that his appeal involves legal points arguable on their merits and that it is not frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Although pro se briefs are liberally construed, Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972), even pro se litigants must brief arguments in order to preserve them, Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, Prince has not shown any error in the dismissal of his consolidated appeals from the bankruptcy court on account of his failure to pay the filing fees. Nor has he shown any error in the district court’s determination that his claims are in essence a collateral attack on the valid and binding summary judgment issued by the bankruptcy court, avoiding the fraudulent transfers of certain real property. Because the district court did not err in determining that the appeal was not taken in good faith, the motion to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202. As Prince’s appeal is without arguable merit, see Howard, 707 F.2d at 220, it is DISMISSED as frivolous, see 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Prince’s alternative request to withdraw his appeal without prejudice is 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. * 2 Case: 16-41158 Document: 00514103404 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/04/2017 No. 16-41158 DENIED. The motion to dismiss, incorporated in the response filed by Wayne Stone and Matthew M. Ryan, is DENIED as unnecessary. 3

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?