Fifth Circuit Court Cases - Case Law and Opinions from the 5th Circuit Federal Court - Court of Appeals

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions - 5th Circuit
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE

This opinion or court case is from the Fifth Circuit Court or Appeals. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.
No. 92-1954
Summary Calendar.
Steven Jack LORAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
FURR'S/BISHOP'S INC. and Michael J. Levenson, Defendants-Appellees,
L.C. Strawn, Appellant.
April 15, 1993.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
Before REAVLEY, DAVIS and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
REAVLEY, Circuit Judge:
Steven J. Loran, as class representative, proposed to settle a securities-fraud class-action suit
against Furr's/Bishop's, Inc. and Michael J. Levinson. Class member L.C. Strawn felt that the
settlement's release provision was too broad and that the district court should insert limiting language
in the settlement contract.
Strawn's attorney asked the district court for permission to appear without obtaining local
counsel, and explained that Strawn "does not seek to litigate an action in this district, but merely to
be permitted to state his objections to a [pending] proposed class action settlement...." Strawn never
asked the court for permission to intervene as a party under FED.R.CIV.P. 24. The district court
received Strawn's written submissions and provided Strawn a hearing, but ultimately refused to insert
the language requested by Strawn.
Strawn then filed a Notice of Appeal in this court, and both parties extensively briefed the
issues presented by Strawn. But we have no jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a class member
who has not attempted to intervene as a named party. See Walker v. City of Mesquite, 858 F.2d
1071, 1075 (5th Cir.1988).
DISMISSED.