Stacy Terry v. Matthew W. Robinett, et al.

[DO NOT PUBLISH]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 Document: 39-1 Date Filed: 07/11/2023 Page: 1 of 3

-- 1 of 3 --

2 Opinion of the Court 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 R OSENBAUM , 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 im-
permissible shotgun pleading and for lack of subject matter juris-
diction. Because Terry makes no arguments in her opening brief
related to these two reasons that the district court gave for dismiss-
ing her second amended complaint, Terry has abandoned any chal-
lenge 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 Document: 39-1 Date Filed: 07/11/2023 Page: 2 of 3

-- 2 of 3 --

22-13004 Opinion of the Court 3
on appeal by a
pro se litigant are deemed abandoned.”). Terry’s
failure to challenge the district court’s dispositive rulings necessi-
tates 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.
USCA11 Case: 22-13004 Document: 39-1 Date Filed: 07/11/2023 Page: 3 of 3

-- 3 of 3 --