Case ID: f-appx_303/html/0244-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Charles Lavel STRINGER, Plaintiff-Appellant v. William BARNETT, Barbara Dunn, John Waits, Victoria L. Rudlett, Daniel Coker Horton & Bell, P.A., et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 08-60259
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Dec. 23, 2008.
    Charles L. Stringer, Jackson, MS, pro se.
    Before JONES, Chief Judge, and DENNIS and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Charles Stringer, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals the dismissal of various claims, including conspiracy, denial of access to the courts, violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and fraud. These claims arose out of a trial where he was found liable for a motor vehicle accident. He has sued the current defendants — the presiding judge, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, etc. — alleging that they were part of a “mock trial.”

This appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983). Therefore, it is dismissed as frivolous. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Given the Appellant’s extensive and unsuccessful litigation record, Appellant is warned that future filings of repetitious or frivolous appeals may result in the imposition of sanctions. These sanctions may include dismissal, monetary sanctions, and restrictions on his ability to file papers in this court and any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction.

DISMISSED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.