Clewis v. Boates, et al, No. 08-10085 (5th Cir. 2008)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 08-10085 Summary Calendar July 7, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk BORIS TWAIN CLEWIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SCOTT K. BOATES; RORY R. OLSEN, Judge; LINEBARGER GOGGAN BLAIR & SIMPSON, LLP; JAMES M. FILER, SR.; PETER T. STEINMANN; J.W. DON JOHNSON, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas No. 1:07-MC-6 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Boris Clewis, a state prisoner, sued, pro se, various defendants for alleged * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 08-10085 violation of an automatic stay in bankruptcy. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim. We find no error and affirm. The complaint is rambling and difficult if not impossible to understand. Plaintiff asserts that he has an interest in the estate of Redell Clewis, Sr. The defendants include the estate s administrator, a law firm that collects delinquent taxes, an attorney for Martha Clewis, an attorney for Kimberly Clewis-James, and an attorney for Redell Clewis, Jr. The plaintiff makes an incoherent claim to the delinquent taxes, penalties, and interest on certain property. He also seems to suggest that there were foreclosure actions and other actions by the defendants that somehow violated the automatic stay. He does not articulate, with any degree of clarity, exactly what the actions were or how they are alleged to have violated the automatic stay. Plaintiff also requests the appointment of counsel. The district court correctly dismissed for failure to state a claim. Its actions are in all respects AFFIRMED. 2

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.