Ferguson vs. Starrett, (5th Cir. 1996)
Linked as:
Text
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-60451
Conference Calendar
RONALD JASON FERGUSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
KEITH STARRETT,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 3:96-CV-190-L-H
October 24, 1996
Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:* Ronald Jason Ferguson (Mississippi prisoner # 82238) appeals the district court's dismissal of his suit as barred by the doctrine of absolute judicial immunity. Because Ferguson sought injunctive relief rather than monetary damages, the district court erred by employing the doctrine of absolute judicial immunity. Holloway v. Walker, 765 F.2d 517, 525 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,
Under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine, federal district courts lack subject-matter jurisdiction to review state court judgments.
United States v. Shepherd, 23 F.3d 923, 924 (5th Cir. 1994); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.,263 U.S. 413 (1923); District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman,460 U.S. 462 (1983). If the issues raised in the federal district court are "inextricably intertwined" with a state judgment, the court is "in essence being called upon to review the state-court decision," and the court lacks jurisdiction to conduct such a review. Shepherd, 23 F.3d at 924 (internal quotations and citations omitted). A plaintiff cannot circumvent this jurisdictional limitation by framing his complaint in the form of a civil rights action under § 1983. Liedtke v. State Bar of Texas, 18 F.3d 315, 317 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 271 (1994).
Ferguson sought federal review of the state-court decision to rescind his participation in Mississippi's shock-probation program. Under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine, the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear the claims. See Liedtke, 18 F.3d at 317-18. Because the district court lacked jurisdiction, the appeal is without merit.
AFFIRMED.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule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.
Sponsored links
This document cites
- U.S. Supreme Court - District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983)
- U.S. Supreme Court - Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923)
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - J. Brent Liedtke, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the State Bar of Texas, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees., 18 F.3d 315 (5th Cir. 1994)
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John Shepherd, Individually and as Substitute Trustee, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants., 23 F.3d 923 (5th Cir. 1994)
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Pat S. Holloway, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Judge Dee Brown Walker, Et Al., Defendants, Judge Dee Brown Walker, Defendant-Appellant., 765 F.2d 517 (5th Cir. 1985)
See other documents that cite the same legislation
