IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-60768
Summary Calendar
CRAIG ROBERTS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
EDWARD HARGETT, ET AL.,
Defendants,
CO-1 EVANS, ET AL.,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 4:94CV38-B-D
- - - - - - - - - -
July 3, 1996
Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Craig Roberts, MSP No. 99054, appeals the district court’s
judgment for the defendants following a bench trial regarding
Roberts’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging inadequate medical care
in deliberate indifference to Roberts’ serious medical needs.
Roberts is mainly challenging the district court’s credibility
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-60768
- 2 -
choices, which this court will not reweigh on appeal. See
Martin v. Thomas, 973 F.2d 449, 453 n.3 (5th Cir. 1992). The
district court did not clearly err in its findings and did not
err in its legal conclusions. See Odom v. Frank, 3 F.3d 839, 843
(5th Cir. 1993).
Roberts has not preserved his challenge to the district
court’s rulings on his discovery requests because he has failed
to adequately brief the issue. See Price v. Digital Equip.
Corp., 846 F.2d 1026, 1028 (5th Cir. 1988).
Because Roberts did not notify the district court of his
intent to call Evans as a witness, the district court did not err
by not requiring Evans to appear at trial. See generally, Fed R.
Civ. P. 45.
AFFIRMED.