Manning Rollerson v. City of Freeport, Texas, et a, No. 13-20500 (5th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 13-20500 Document: 00512534344 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-20500 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED February 17, 2014 MANNING NELSON ROLLERSON, Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Plaintiff-Appellant v. CITY OF FREEPORT, TEXAS; FREEPORT POLICE DEPARTMENT; CHRIS BRYANT; OTHER UNKNOWN POLICE OFFICERS OF THE FREEPORT POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants-Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:12-CV-1790 Before WIENER, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Plaintiff-Appellant Manning Nelson Rollerson sued the DefendantsAppellees for damages that he alleged resulted from an altercation between himself and Defendant-Appellee Bryant. Rollerson filed this action in the district court claiming civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. §1983, and 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 13-20500 Document: 00512534344 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2014 No. 13-20500 violations of his constitutional rights under the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Defendants-Appellees sought dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim, and Rollerson failed to respond. After granting the dismissal motion of Defendants-Appellees under Rule 12(b)(6), the district court ordered Rollerson to replead and amend his complaint. When Rollerson failed to do so, the district court dismissed his action with prejudice. We have reviewed the facts as alleged and the applicable law as set forth in the briefs of the parties and in the extensive Opinion and Order rendered by the district court on May 16, 2013. As a result, we are convinced that the court committed no reversible error and, to the contrary, correctly decided the case under the circumstances. Accordingly, the Judgment of the district court is, 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.