Magee v. Varsity Brands Holding Company, Incorporated
July 1, 2026·25-11092·Per Curiam·By Maria Santos
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of a pro se plaintiff's civil action. The court held that the plaintiff failed to preserve arguments challenging the dismissal of his breach of contract and trademark claims.
Steven D. Magee, proceeding pro se, appealed the district court’s dismissal of his civil action in the Northern District of Texas. Magee contended that the district court erred in refusing to pierce the corporate veil and in dismissing his breach of contract and trademark claims.
The court’s reasoning
Under Texas law, a party may pierce the corporate veil only if it demonstrates that the entity was used to perpetrate and did perpetrate actual fraud. The court noted that even pro se filings are afforded liberal construction, but litigants must still brief arguments to preserve them. Magee failed to address or identify any error in the district court’s finding that his allegations of fraud were conclusory, thereby abandoning any challenge to that finding.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that pro se litigants must adequately brief legal arguments to preserve claims, particularly regarding corporate veil piercing and fraud allegations, and that conclusory allegations are insufficient to overcome a dismissal.
