Brenda Moore v. James Yeldell, et al, No. 12-30628 (5th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

This opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on July 25, 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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