Case: 16-60111 Document: 00513641813 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/17/2016
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
No. 16-60111 Fifth Circuit
Summary Calendar FILED
August 17, 2016
Lyle W. Cayce
VINSON BALLARD, Clerk
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY; DOCTOR MARCUS A. CHANAY,
Individually and in his Professional Capacity; DOCTOR LORIA BROWN,
Individually and in her Professional Capacity; MICHAEL THOMAS,
Individually and in his Professional Capacity; DOCTOR CAROLYN MYERS,
Individually and in her Professional Capacity; WAYNE GOODWIN,
Individually and in his Professional Capacity; PAMELA MITCHELL,
Individually and in her Professional Capacity; ROBIN PACK, Individually
and in her Professional Capacity; DOCTOR CURTIS JOHNSON,
Individually and in his Professional Capacity; FRANCIS HORTON WHITE,
Individually and in her Professional Capacity; ATTORNEY DAVID
BUFORD, Individually and in his Professional Capacity,
Defendants-Appellees
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 3:13-CV-672
Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Case: 16-60111 Document: 00513641813 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/17/2016
No. 16-60111
Plaintiff-Appellant Vinson Ballard a/k/a Rev. Vinson Ballard, M.S.,
proceeding pro se on appeal after being represented by counsel in the district
court, makes largely unintelligible complaints about the proceedings and
results of a court supervised and approved settlement of various employment
claims between Ballard and Jackson State University, the sole remaining
Defendant-Appellee. We have carefully and painstakingly reviewed the record
on appeal, including the briefs of the parties and the various rulings and orders
of the magistrate judge and the district court from which Ballard appears to
appeal. As a result of our review, we find no reversible error in any of the
proceedings or rulings, and conclude that Plaintiff-Appellant Ballard has had
all the procedural and substantive process to which he is due. The orders and
rulings from which Ballard appeals are, in all respects,
AFFIRMED.
2