IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-50010
Summary Calendar
EDDIE HERNANDEZ,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
NATHAN, Doctor; LEN O. KERR, JR., Doctor,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-96-CV-189
- - - - - - - - - -
December 15, 1997
Before JONES, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Eddie Hernandez (#702949) has moved for appointment of
counsel. Hernandez has failed to show that exceptional
circumstances require appointment of counsel. See Ulmer v.
Chancellor, 691 F.2d 209, 212 (5th Cir. 1982). The motion is
DENIED.
Hernandez has moved this court for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis on appeal. Under the circumstances of this case, we
construe the motion as an appeal from the district court’s order
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 97-50010
-2-
certifying that this appeal was not taken in good faith. See
Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Hernandez
contends that the district court improperly resolved disputed
issues of fact and failed to provide him with an opportunity to
develop his allegations in dismissing his complaint for failure
to state a claim and as legally frivolous. The complaint,
however, alleged no more than disagreement with Hernandez’
medical treatment. See Varnado v. Lynaugh, 920 F.2d 320, 321 (5th Cir. 1991).
The district court did not err in certifying that this appeal was
not taken in good faith. The motion for leave to proceed IFP on
appeal is DENIED.
Because Hernandez’ appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED.
See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th
Cir. R. 42.2. We caution Hernandez that any additional frivolous
appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To
avoid sanctions, Hernandez is further cautioned to review any
pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that
are frivolous.
MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED; IFP DENIED; APPEAL
DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.