Moore v. Moore, No. 22-60653 (5th Cir. 2023)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 22-60653 Document: 00516638749 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/08/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 22-60653 Summary Calendar February 8, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Surf Moore, Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Stanley Moore, Defendant—Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:22-CV-628 Before Davis, Smith, and Douglas, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Surf Moore appeals the district court’s judgment dismissing his action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). This statute authorizes dismissal of an action brought by a plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis when that action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 22-60653 Document: 00516638749 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/08/2023 No. 22-60653 or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii). We AFFIRM. Plaintiff, Surf Moore, a resident of Jackson, Mississippi, sued Defendant, Stanley Moore, a resident of Los Angeles, California, alleging that Plaintiff’s mother died in March 2018 leaving a truck. Plaintiff contends that he is entitled to inherit the truck and that Defendant refuses to sign an affidavit necessary for changing registration to the truck. Plaintiff seeks a temporary restraining order requiring Defendant to sign the affidavit. Plaintiff alleges, in conclusory fashion, that Defendant has violated Plaintiff’s constitutional rights under the Thirteenth Amendment. However, he alleges no facts to support that claim or any other claim. For this reason and those stated in the district court’s November 29, 2022, order, we AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal without prejudice for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 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.