Vinson Ballard v. Jackson State University, et al, No. 16-60111 (5th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 16-60111 Document: 00513641813 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/17/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 16-60111 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED August 17, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk VINSON BALLARD, Plaintiff-Appellant v. JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY; DOCTOR MARCUS A. CHANAY, Individually and in his Professional Capacity; DOCTOR LORIA BROWN, Individually and in her Professional Capacity; MICHAEL THOMAS, Individually and in his Professional Capacity; DOCTOR CAROLYN MYERS, Individually and in her Professional Capacity; WAYNE GOODWIN, Individually and in his Professional Capacity; PAMELA MITCHELL, Individually and in her Professional Capacity; ROBIN PACK, Individually and in her Professional Capacity; DOCTOR CURTIS JOHNSON, Individually and in his Professional Capacity; FRANCIS HORTON WHITE, Individually and in her Professional Capacity; ATTORNEY DAVID BUFORD, Individually and in his Professional Capacity, Defendants-Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:13-CV-672 Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 16-60111 Document: 00513641813 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/17/2016 No. 16-60111 Plaintiff-Appellant Vinson Ballard a/k/a Rev. Vinson Ballard, M.S., proceeding pro se on appeal after being represented by counsel in the district court, makes largely unintelligible complaints about the proceedings and results of a court supervised and approved settlement of various employment claims between Ballard and Jackson State University, the sole remaining Defendant-Appellee. We have carefully and painstakingly reviewed the record on appeal, including the briefs of the parties and the various rulings and orders of the magistrate judge and the district court from which Ballard appears to appeal. As a result of our review, we find no reversible error in any of the proceedings or rulings, and conclude that Plaintiff-Appellant Ballard has had all the procedural and substantive process to which he is due. The orders and rulings from which Ballard appeals 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.
