Linda Selensky v. State of Alabama, No. 11-13288 (11th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED ________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 11-13288 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT NOVEMBER 4, 2011 JOHN LEY CLERK D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cv-00195-KD-B LINDA CONE SELENSKY, llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF ALABAMA, llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama ________________________ (November 4, 2011) Before WILSON, MARTIN and FAY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Plaintiff Linda Selensky, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals the district court s sua sponte dismissal of her amended complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). We affirm. We review the district court s dismissal of a claim as frivolous for abuse of discretion. Bilal v. Driver, 251 F.3d 1346, 1349 (11th Cir. 2001). A claim is frivolous if it is without arguable merit either in fact or law. Id. At the same time, we recognize that pro se pleadings are construed liberally. Hughes v. Lott, 350 F.3d 1157, 1160 (11th Cir. 2003). Here, Selensky appears to allege that she has been deprived of her civil rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Her amended complaint mentions due process, discrimination, civil rights conspiracy, fraud, false imprisonment, assault and battery, and the tort of outrage. There are not, however, factual allegations accompanying these claims that would plausibly entitle Selensky to relief. Moreover, there is no legal claim sufficient to overcome the State of Alabama s sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment. See Alabama v. Pugh, 438 U.S. 781, 782, 98 S. Ct. 3057, 3057 58 (1978) (per curiam); Cross v. Alabama, 49 F.3d 1490, 1502 (11th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, there is no arguable merit to Selensky s claim, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing it as frivolous. AFFIRMED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.