Gloria J. Hoegh v. Emerson R. Thompson, et al., No. 13-12501 (11th Cir. 2015)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 13-12501 Date Filed: 01/05/2015 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 13-12501 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 6:13-cv-00367-CEH-DAB GLORIA J. HOEGH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EMERSON R. THOMPSON, Judge, Ninth Judicial Circuit Court for Orange County, FL, CYNTHIA Z. MACKINNON, Judge, Ninth Judicial Circuit for Orange County, FL, WILLIAM D. PALMER, Judge, Fifth District Court of Appeals, VINCENT G. TORPY, JR., Judge, Fifth District Court of Appeals, KERRY I. EVANDER, Judge, Fifth District Court of Appeals, Defendants - Appellees. Case: 13-12501 Date Filed: 01/05/2015 Page: 2 of 3 ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida ________________________ (January 5, 2015) Before WILSON, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Gloria Hoegh brought a complaint in the United StatesDistrict Court for the Middle District of Florida against a number of Florida state circuit and district judges (Defendants), styled as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Hoegh sought review of the conduct of a state court foreclosure action brought by Credit-Based Asset Servicing and Securitization, LLC, expressly referencing a provision of the Florida Constitution that she believes was violated by Defendants. The district court dismissed the complaint after concluding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., which holds that a district court does not have jurisdiction to review judgments of state courts of competent jurisdiction based on purported constitutional violations. See 263 U.S. 413, 415–16, 44 S. Ct. 149, 150 (1923). We review dismissal of a complaint by the district court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction de novo. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Fla. v. United States, 2 Case: 13-12501 Date Filed: 01/05/2015 Page: 3 of 3 EPA, 105 F.3d 599, 602 (11th Cir. 1997). The district court properly applied Rooker and therefore did not err. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal. AFFIRMED. 3

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.