Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-51042/USCOURTS-ca5-15-51042-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation
Appellee
Maverick Production Company, Incorporated
Appellee
Lee Perry
Appellant
Railroad Commission of Texas
Appellee
Samson Exploration, L.L.C.
Appellee
Samson Lone Star, L.L.C.
Appellee
Paul E. Schenfelder
Appellee
Stacy Schusterman
Appellee
Barry T. Smitherman
Appellee
Viesca Gas Company
Appellee
R. A. Walker
Appellee
J. Michael Yeager
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-51042

Summary Calendar

LEE PERRY, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS; BARRY T. SMITHERMAN, 

Chairman Anadarko Petroleum Corporation; ANADARKO PETROLEUM 

CORPORATION; CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER R. A. WALKER; 

MAVERICK PRODUCTION COMPANY, INCORPORATED; CHIEF 

EXECUTIVE OFFICER J. MICHAEL YEAGER; SAMSON EXPLORATION, 

L.L.C.; SAMSON LONE STAR, L.L.C.; PRESIDENT STACY 

SCHUSTERMAN; VIESCA GAS COMPANY; PRESIDENT PAUL E. 

SCHENFELDER, 

 Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:15-CV-111

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 22, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-51042 Document: 00513646602 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/22/2016
No. 15-51042

2

This court has before it the district court’s orders dated July 31, 2015, 

September 30, 2015 and October 15, 2015, dismissing this case. And all of 

pleadings, exhibits, and the brief have been considered. It is apparent that the 

Plaintiff believes he has been damaged, and that the Defendants have 

responsibility for that. However, this court has to decide whether we have 

legal authority to make some ruling on the complaints of the Plaintiff, or 

whether the district court had the legal authority to do so.

For there was to be legal authority of these federal courts to act upon the 

complaint of the Plaintiff, so there had to be specific factual allegations against 

each Defendant for which there might be liability. That is lacking in anything 

to be found in this record. It is necessary for this court to follow the law of 

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) and affirm the dismissal of the case.

AFFIRM.

 Case: 15-51042 Document: 00513646602 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/22/2016