Jerome Ellis v. Ms. Oliver, et al., No. 20-13925 (11th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
USCA11 Case: 20-13925 Date Filed: 01/19/2022 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20-13925 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ JEROME ELLIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus MS. OLIVER, Nurse Practitioner, DEPUTY WARDEN GIBBONS, Security, JOHN AND OR JANE DOES, Johnson State Prison, JOHN AND OR JANE DOES, Medical Administrator, OFFICER THOMAS, et al., USCA11 Case: 20-13925 2 Date Filed: 01/19/2022 Page: 2 of 3 Opinion of the Court 20-13925 Defendants-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 3:20-cv-00033-DHB-BKE ____________________ Before JORDAN, BRASHER, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Jerome Ellis appeals the district court’s (a) denial of his motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and (b) dismissal without prejudice of his pro se amended complaint against various Georgia prison officials for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need and violations of his First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights. He argues that prison officials violated his constitutional rights by, among other things, failing to adequately treat his chronic pain and by interfering with his legal mail. To obtain reversal of a district court judgment that is based on multiple, independent grounds, an appellant must establish that every ground for the judgment against him is incorrect. See Sapuppo v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co., 739 F.3d 678, 680 (11th Cir. 2014). When an appellant fails to challenge on appeal one of the grounds for the district court’s judgment, he has abandoned any challenge of that ground, and the judgment is due to be affirmed. USCA11 Case: 20-13925 20-13925 Date Filed: 01/19/2022 Opinion of the Court Page: 3 of 3 3 See id. An appellant abandons a claim or argument on appeal when (1) he makes only passing references to it; (2) he raises it in a perfunctory manner without supporting arguments and authority; (3) he refers to it only in the “statement of the case” or “summary of the argument”; or (4) the references to the issue are mere background to the appellant’s main arguments or are buried within those arguments. See id. at 681-82. The district court denied Mr. Ellis’ motion to proceed IFP because he had three “strikes” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and had not alleged that he was in imminent danger of physical harm or injury. The district court also alternatively ruled that Mr. Ellis’ suit should be dismissed as a sanction for failing to correctly disclose his prior litigation history. We affirm the district court’s order. Simply stated, Mr. Ellis abandoned any challenge to either of the grounds for the district court’s ruling by failing to mention on appeal the three-strikes provision or his filing history. AFFIRMED. 1 1 We note that Mr. Ellis has filed a number of motions that are pending. All of these motions are DENIED.
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.
