Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-50202/USCOURTS-ca5-14-50202-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Brewster County, Texas
Appellee
Ronny Dodson
Appellee
Cheryl Olibas
Appellant
Pascual Q. Olibas
Appellant

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50202

PASCUAL Q. OLIBAS, Individually, doing business as Freedom Bail Bonds; 

CHERYL OLIBAS, Individually, doing business as Freedom Bail Bonds, 

 Plaintiffs - Appellants

v.

SHERIFF RONNY DODSON, as Sheriff of Brewster County, Texas; 

BREWSTER COUNTY, TEXAS, 

 Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 4:11-CV-94

Before KING, DAVIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiffs Pascual and Cheryl Olibas, doing business as Freedom Bail 

Bonds (“the Olibases”) filed this § 1983 action (along with related state actions) 

* 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

February 19, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

Case: 14-50202 Document: 00512940565 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/19/2015
No. 14-50202

against Brewster County Sheriff, Ronny Dodson individually and in his official 

capacity.1

The Olibases complained that the Sheriff placed such onerous conditions 

on Plaintiffs’ ability to write bail bonds in Brewster County that it made them 

unable to write bonds. Plaintiffs asserted a First Amendment claim alleging 

that Plaintiffs’ complaints to the Brewster County judge about the Sheriff’s 

conduct caused the defendant to retaliate against Plaintiffs and impose these 

onerous conditions. Plaintiffs also alleged that the Sheriff, in placing more 

onerous conditions on their right to issue bail bonds than were placed on their

competitors, violated their rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the 

Constitution.

After a careful review of the record and consideration of the briefs and 

argument of counsel, we are not persuaded that the district court committed 

reversible error in dismissing Plaintiffs’ First Amendment claims. We agree 

with the district court that neither the complaint nor the summary judgment 

record supports an inference that the complaints to government officials were 

causally related to the complained of actions of the defendant in making it 

more difficult for Plaintiffs to write bail bonds.

On Plaintiffs’ equal protection claim – both against the Sheriff 

individually and in his official capacity – we agree that the complaint and 

summary judgment record establish that the defendant did not treat the

plaintiffs substantially different from other individuals and firms writing bail 

bonds in Brewster County. The district court, therefore, did not err in 

1 The Olibases also named Brewster County as a defendant in this suit. However, it 

is well-settled that claims against a municipal official in his official capacity are claims 

against the county. Ky. v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 166 (1985); Turner v. Houma Mun. Fire & 

Police Civ. Serv. Bd., 229 F.3d 478, 485 (5th Cir. 2000). Therefore, we need not consider the 

County separate from the Sheriff in his official capacity.

2

 

Case: 14-50202 Document: 00512940565 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/19/2015
No. 14-50202

dismissing the action for relief against the Sheriff in his individual and official 

capacities.2

For these reasons and the reasons assigned by the district court the 

judgment of the district court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

2 The district court also dismissed Plaintiffs’ state law claims. Plaintiffs do not 

challenge that ruling on appeal.

3

 

Case: 14-50202 Document: 00512940565 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/19/2015