# Jones v. Board of Supervisors

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · April 29, 1999 · 180 F.3d 264

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/17645

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** April 29, 1999
- **Citations:** 180 F.3d 264
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/17645

## Opinion text

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-60294
Summary Calendar

LARRY LEE JONES,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, of Franklin County, Mississippi;
JAMES NEWMAN, Sheriff,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 3:97-CV-323-LN
- - - - - - - - - -

April 28, 1999

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Larry Lee Jones, Mississippi prisoner #19614, appeals from

the grant of summary judgment for the defendants in his

prisoner’s civil rights action. Jones contends that the district

court erred by granting summary judgment for the Board of

Supervisors and for Sheriff James Newman in his official capacity

because the defendants should be liable for Sheriff Newman’s

abuse of his policy-making capacity. He argues that a list of

dates written by Sheriff Newman created a genuine issue of

*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 98-60294
-2-

material fact regarding when Sheriff Newman knew of the injury to

his (Jones’s) hand and therefore of his need for medical

treatment. Jones finally contends that the district court

deprived him of his right to a jury trial by granting summary

judgment for the defendants.

Regarding Jones’s medical-care claims, we have reviewed the

record and the briefs of the parties and we find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm the grant of summary judgment on

those claims for essentially the same reasons as relied upon by

the district court. See Jones v. Bd. of Supervisors, No. 3:97-

CV-323-LN (S.D. Miss. Apr. 16, 1998). Finally, Jones’s right to

a jury trial was not violated by the grant of summary judgment.

Plaisance v. Phelps, 845 F.2d 107, 108 (5th Cir. 1988).

AFFIRMED.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/17645. Public record. Not legal advice.