Wayne Reavis, Jr. v. James LeBlanc, et al, No. 13-30488 (5th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on January 6, 2014.
Download PDF
Case: 13-30488 Document: 00512490446 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/06/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-30488 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED January 6, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk WAYNE MICHAEL REAVIS, JR., Plaintiff Appellant, versus JAMES M. LEBLANC, Secretary, Department of Corrections; LOUISIANA STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; LOUISIANA STATE PAROLE BOARD, Defendants Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:12-CV-2879 Before JOLLY, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Wayne Reavis, Jr., pro se and in forma pauperis ( IFP ), sued the various 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-30488 Document: 00512490446 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/06/2014 No. 13-30488 state defendants under 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 seeking money damages and immediate release from confinement based on an alleged miscalculation of his sentence. The allegations are virtually identical to those in another federal suit that was dismissed and not appealed. Here, the district court adopted the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissed with prejudice, primarily on the ground of res judicata. As the magistrate judge said, quoting Wilson v. Lynaugh, 878 F.2d 846, 850 (5th Cir. 1980), IFP complaints may be dismissed as frivolous . . . when they seek to relitigate claims which allege substantially the same facts arising from a common series of events which have already been unsuccessfully litigated by the IFP plaintiff. The judgment of dismissal is AFFIRMED. All pending motions are DENIED. 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.
