IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-21128
Conference Calendar
ANDRE JOEL HOWARD,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
THE STATE OF TEXAS;
WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-00-CV-2953
--------------------
August 21, 2001
Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Andre Howard appeals the district court’s dismissal of his
complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). Howard filed suit against the State of
Texas and its agency, the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission
(the “Commission”), alleging violations of the Fourteenth
Amendment and defamation of character. We review the district
court’s dismissal de novo. See Den Norske Stats Oljeselskap As
v. Heeremac Vof, 241 F.3d 420, 424 (5th Cir. 2001).
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-21128
-2-
Howard did not brief the jurisdictional issue and has
therefore abandoned it. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25
(5th Cir. 1993); see also Price v. Digital Equip. Corp., 846 F.2d
1026, 1028 (5th Cir. 1988). Nevertheless, “in the absence of
consent a suit in which the State or one of its agencies or
departments is named as the defendant is proscribed by the
Eleventh Amendment.” Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman,
465 U.S. 89, 100 (1984) Howard has not shown that the Commission
or the State of Texas has waived immunity from suit. The appeal
is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). It is therefore DISMISSED.
5TH CIR. R. 42.2.