Eugene T. Foust, Plaintiff-appellant,andmary Ann Johnson Foust, and Margaret Ann Johnson, an Allegeddeprived Child, Plaintiffs, v. Oral Roberts University; Oral Roberts; Richard Roberts;clarence Boyd; Michael Yoakum; Scott Smith;gary L. Gibson; Larry Johnson; Andgina M. Chorost, Defendants-appellees, 105 F.3d 669 (10th Cir. 1997)
Annotate this CaseBefore BRORBY, EBEL and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Mr. Foust is a pro se civil litigant. Mr. Foust filed this action and appealed an adverse decision granting defendants summary judgment. We affirmed in an unpublished decision. See Foust v. Oral Roberts University, No. 93-5169 (10th Cir. Apr. 5, 1994).
Mr. Foust then returned to district court and filed a motion to remand this case to the state court system. The district court denied the motion, and Mr. Foust now appeals.
The law of the case bars this appeal. The decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.
This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
