Nathaniel Mingo v. Bossier Maximum Corrtl Facil, e
699 F. App'x 409
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Nathaniel A. Mingo, a Louisiana prisoner, appealed the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil-rights complaint for failure to state a claim.
- Mingo moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal; the district court denied IFP and certified the appeal was not taken in good faith.
- Mingo alleged he has a lifelong disability from injuries, was referred to a specialist, and was denied timely/adequate medical care, but provided only conclusory statements without factual detail linking defendants to constitutional violations.
- He asserted entitlement to a Spears hearing to develop factual claims and a Seventh Amendment jury trial, but did not identify nonfrivolous issues or explain how the law applied to his facts.
- The Fifth Circuit reviewed whether the appeal presented legal points arguable on their merits and concluded Mingo raised no nonfrivolous issues; it denied IFP and dismissed the appeal as frivolous.
- The dismissal of the appeal and the district court’s dismissal each count as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Mingo was warned about the three-strike rule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IFP should be granted on appeal | Mingo sought IFP, asserting meritorious claims | Court viewed appeal as frivolous; IFP inappropriate | IFP denied; appeal not taken in good faith |
| Whether complaint stated an Eighth Amendment medical-care claim | Mingo alleged denial of adequate/timely care and referral to specialist | District court: allegations were conclusory, no facts tying defendants to harm | Dismissal for failure to state a claim affirmed; no nonfrivolous issue identified |
| Whether a Spears hearing was required | Mingo requested a hearing to develop facts | District court used a questionnaire serving same function; hearing not mandatory | No Spears hearing required; claim waived for lack of development |
| Whether Mingo was entitled to a jury trial | Mingo asserted Seventh Amendment right to jury | He failed to identify a viable claim or explain applicability | Bare assertion rejected; no nonfrivolous appellate issue |
Key Cases Cited
- Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197 (5th Cir. 1997) (standards for IFP and frivolous-appeal dismissal)
- Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215 (5th Cir. 1983) (appeal review limited to whether legal points are arguable on the merits)
- Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744 (5th Cir. 1987) (issues not briefed on appeal are treated as abandoned)
- Spears v. McCotter, 766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir. 1985) (Spears hearing permits prisoner to explain factual basis of claims)
- Brewster v. Dretke, 587 F.3d 764 (5th Cir. 2009) (questionnaire can serve the function of a Spears hearing)
- Green v. McKaskle, 788 F.2d 1116 (5th Cir. 1986) (procedures for developing pro se prisoner pleadings)
- Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222 (5th Cir. 1993) (failure to brief issues on appeal results in waiver)
- Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383 (5th Cir. 1996) (dismissals for frivolousness/counting strikes under § 1915(g))