Gregory Johnson v. Darren Cowthorn, et al, No. 15-31011 (5th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 15-31011 Document: 00513479357 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/25/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 15-31011 United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED GREGORY LYNN JOHNSON, April 25, 2016 Plaintiff-Appellant Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. DARREN COWTHORN; VALANDOR COWTHORN, Defendants-Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:14-CV-3038 Before DAVIS, JONES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Gregory Lynn Johnson, Louisiana prisoner # 46415, moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as frivolous. The district court concluded that Johnson’s complaint was time barred. Johnson’s request for IFP status was denied, and the district court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. By moving to proceed IFP on appeal, Johnson challenges the district court’s certification. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 15-31011 Document: 00513479357 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/25/2016 No. 15-31011 Johnson argues that he was entitled to tolling of the limitations period based on the doctrine of contra non valentem because he was unaware of his legal rights. Johnson’s own ignorance of his cause of action does not entitle him to tolling of the limitations period. See Corsey v. Louisiana, 375 So. 2d 1319, 1321-22 (La. 1979); see also Terrebonne Parish Sch. Bd. v. Mobil Oil Corp., 310 F.3d 870, 885 (5th Cir. 2002). This appeal lacks arguable legal merit and is, therefore, frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Johnson’s motion to proceed IFP is denied, and we dismiss his appeal as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. The district court’s dismissal of his complaint and the dismissal of this appeal as frivolous count as two strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). Johnson is warned that if he accumulates three strikes under § 1915(g), he will not be able to proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g). IFP MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED. 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.
