IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-30046
Conference Calendar
LEAVORDA L. SMALLEY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS ET AL.,
Defendants,
WILLIE THOMAS,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 99-CV-246-D
--------------------
August 21, 2001
Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Leavorda L. Smalley, Louisiana prisoner # 106878, appeals
the district court’s order granting a judgment as a matter of law
in favor of Willie Thomas. Smalley argues that the district
court erred in holding that he had not presented sufficient
evidence to establish that Thomas used excessive force against
him and in granting a judgment as a matter of law in favor of
Thomas.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-30046
-2-
This court reviews de novo the district court’s grant of a
judgment as a matter of law, using the same standards as the
district court. Hidden Oaks Ltd. v. City of Austin, 138 F.3d
1036, 1042 (5th Cir. 1998). Under Rule 50, a court must render
judgment as a matter of law when “`a party has been fully heard
on an issue and there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis
for a reasonable jury to find for that party on that issue.’”
Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prod., 530 U.S. 133, 149 (2000)
(citation omitted); Mattern v. Eastman Kodak Co., 104 F.3d 702,
705 (5th Cir. 1997).
Smalley has not provided a trial transcript. Review of the
district court’s judgment as a matter of law requires de novo
review of the entire record, including the trial transcript. See
Reeves, 530 U.S. at 150. Without a transcript, this court cannot
review whether the district court erred in granting a judgment as
a matter of law as it is impossible to determine whether there
was a legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury
to find for Smalley. See id. at 149. Because Smalley has not
provided a transcript, he cannot show that the district court
erred in granting a judgment as a matter of law in favor of
Thomas. Therefore, the district court’s judgment is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.