Case Name: Elzina AVALOS; et al., Plaintiffs, v. ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY; et al., Defendants, v. Claude Hugh LLOYD, Jr., Movant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-10-22
Citations: 78 F. App'x 428
Docket Number: No. 02-20947
Parties: Elzina AVALOS; et al., Plaintiffs, v. ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY; et al., Defendants, v. Claude Hugh LLOYD, Jr., Movant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 78
Pages: 428–429

Head Matter:
Elzina AVALOS; et al., Plaintiffs, v. ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY; et al., Defendants, v. Claude Hugh LLOYD, Jr., Movant-Appellant.
No. 02-20947.
Conference Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 22, 2003.
Claude Hugh Lloyd, pro se, Baytown, TX, for Movant-Appellant.
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Claude Hugh Lloyd, Jr., appeals from the district court's order denying his Emergency Motion for Leave and Motion for Nunc Pro Tunc Order with Judicial Notice, in which he sought to be substituted for Mary Beth Angel as trustee of the Lloyd Trust for purposes of the above-referenced litigation. Lloyd has also filed a Motion for Summary Reversal and Designation of Orders on Appeal.
Lloyd's nunc pro tunc motion was an unauthorized motion, which the district court should have dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See United States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir.1994). We affirm the judgment on this alternative basis. See id. Lloyd's Motion for Summary Reversal and Designation of Orders on Appeal is denied.
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.