William C. Foss, Plaintiff-appellant, v. State of Kansas, Defendant-appellee, 996 F.2d 310 (10th Cir. 1993)

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); Tenth Cir.R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Appellant William C. Foss appeals the order of the United States District Court for the District of Kansas granting Appellee State of Kansas' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the reasons stated below, we affirm.

Appellant had filed an action alleging malpractice and fraud against his attorney in state district court. The state district court granted summary judgment against Appellant, and the court of appeals affirmed. The Kansas Supreme Court denied review.

Appellant subsequently brought this claim against the State of Kansas in federal district court, alleging that the State of Kansas violated his Seventh and Fourteenth Amendment rights by denying him a jury trial. The court granted the State's motion to dismiss on Eleventh Amendment grounds.

The Eleventh Amendment provides:

"The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State."

U.S. Const.Amend. 11. Although Appellant is a citizen of Kansas, the Eleventh Amendment has been construed to bar suits against a state by its own citizens. Meade v. Grubbs, 841 F.2d 1512 (10th Cir.). See also, Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1.

Because the State of Kansas is protected by the immunity provided by the Eleventh Amendment, we are jurisdictionally barred from hearing Appellant's claim.

Accordingly, the order of the District Court for the District of Kansas is AFFIRMED.