Brenda Moore v. James Yeldell, et al, No. 12-30628 (5th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on July 30, 2013.
Download PDF
Case: 12-30628 Document: 00512321493 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/25/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED July 25, 2013 No. 12-30628 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk BRENDA MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. JAMES E. YELDELL; AMY ELLENDER; LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT; 4TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT; COURT OF APPEAL 2ND CIRCUIT; FRANK MOORE, SR.; ELNORA THOMAS; SCOTT LEEHY, Defendants-Appellants Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:12-CV-364 Before WIENER, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Plaintiff-Appellant Brenda Moore, proceeding pro se, appeals the judgment of the district court which adopted the March 9, 2012 Report and Recommendations of the magistrate judge and dismissed Moore s claims against the various defendants-appellees, as follows: Her claims against the * Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. Case: 12-30628 Document: 00512321493 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/25/2013 No. 12-30628 Louisiana Court of Appeal for the 2nd Circuit and the 4th District Court for the Parish of Moorehouse were dismissed with prejudice; those against the Louisiana Supreme Court were dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; those against Judge Scott Leehy in his individual capacity were dismissed with prejudice; those against Judge Scott Leehy in his official capacity were dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; and those against Amy Ellender, James Yeldell, Frank Moore, Sr., and Elnora Thomas were dismissed with prejudice. We have reviewed the record on appeal, Moore s appellate brief, and her record excerpts, and we conclude that the judgment of the district court should be, and is hereby, 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.
