Cheryl Price v. Law Firm of Edwin Shorty, Jr., et, No. 15-30028 (5th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 15-30028 Document: 00513356491 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/26/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 15-30028 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED January 26, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk CHERYL PRICE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. EDWIN M. SHORTY, JR., individually; ROBERT MCCLENDON, officially; OFFICE OF RISK MANAGEMENT, officially; LOUISIANA EMPLOYMENT DISCIPLINARY COUNCIL; EDWIN M. SHORTY, JR. & ASSOCIATES, A.P.L.C., Defendants-Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:14-CV-1832 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Cheryl Price, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a complaint against Edwin Shorty, Jr. individually; Edwin M. Shorty, Jr. & Associates, APLC; the Louisiana Office of Risk Management in its official capacity; the Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board (Board) in its official capacity; and Robert McClendon in his official capacity as a state investigator for the Board, 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 15-30028 Document: 00513356491 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/26/2016 No. 15-30028 alleging violations of due process as well as claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and1985 and Louisiana state law. The district court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Price now appeals, arguing that the district court’s dismissal order violated her right to a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment and that the district court had jurisdiction to hear the case under Article III of the Constitution. Our review is de novo. In re Katrina Canal Breaches Litig., 495 F.3d 191, 205 (5th Cir. 2007). Price’s first argument is meritless, because “[d]ismissal of [a] claim[] pursuant to a valid 12(b)(6) motion does not violate [a party’s] right to a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment.” Haase v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 748 F.3d 624, 631 n.5 (5th Cir. 2014). As to Price’s second argument, the Eleventh Amendment “codified the sovereign immunity of the several states . . . [and f]ederal courts are without jurisdiction over suits against a state, a state agency, or a state official in his official capacity unless that state has waived its sovereign immunity or Congress has clearly abrogated it.” Moore v. La. Bd. of Elementary & Secondary Educ., 743 F.3d 959, 963 (5th Cir. 2014). Louisiana has not waived its sovereign immunity, see LA. REV. STAT. ANN. 13:5106(A), and neither § 1983 nor § 1985 abrogates state sovereign immunity, see Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332, 340 (1979); Early v. S. Univ. & Agric. & Mech. College Bd. of Supervisors, 252 F. App’x 698, 700 (5th Cir. 2007). Finally, as Price does not address the district court’s reasons for dismissing her claims against Shorty and his law firm, she has waived her claims against these defendants by failing to preserve them adequately. See Mapes v. Bishop, 541 F.3d 582, 584 (5th Cir. 2008); see also Morin v. Moore, 309 F.3d 316, 328 (5th Cir. 2002) (issues raised for the first time in a reply brief are considered waived). 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.
