Stacy Terry v. Matthew W. Robinett, et al., No. 22-13004 (11th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
USCA11 Case: 22-13004 Document: 39-1 Date Filed: 07/11/2023 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 22-13004 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ STACY TERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus MATTHEW W. ROBINETT, in official and personal capacity, J.R. GAINES, in official and personal capacity, AMANDA BESHEAR COOK, in official and personal capacity, C. MARK BAIN, in official and personal capacity, JOHNNY HARDWICK, USCA11 Case: 22-13004 2 Document: 39-1 Date Filed: 07/11/2023 Opinion of the Court Page: 2 of 3 22-13004 Judge, official and personal capacity, et al., Defendants-Appellees, THE PHOENIX INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama D.C. Docket No. 2:20-cv-01058-RAH-SMD ____________________ Before ROSENBAUM, LAGOA, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Stacy Terry, proceeding pro se, appeals from the district court’s order dismissing her second amended complaint as an impermissible shotgun pleading and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Because Terry makes no arguments in her opening brief related to these two reasons that the district court gave for dismissing her second amended complaint, Terry has abandoned any challenge to those dispositive rulings by the district court. See Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008) (“[I]ssues not briefed USCA11 Case: 22-13004 22-13004 Document: 39-1 Date Filed: 07/11/2023 Opinion of the Court Page: 3 of 3 3 on appeal by a pro se litigant are deemed abandoned.”). Terry’s failure to challenge the district court’s dispositive rulings necessitates that we affirm the district court’s judgment. See Sapuppo v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co., 739 F.3d 678, 680 (11th Cir. 2014) (“When an appellant fails to challenge properly on appeal one of the grounds on which the district court based its judgment, he is deemed to have abandoned any challenge of that ground, and it follows that the judgment is due to be affirmed.”). Accordingly, the district court is AFFIRMED.
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.
