Bosley v. Montgomery, et al

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-30547
Conference Calendar
O’NEAL BOSLEY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
MARVIN MONTGOMERY; DANA LARPENTUER; JAMES
BEST, Judge; LOLA SCOIRTINO, individually,
and On behalf of the estate of Lynndale Scoirtino;
On behalf of Lynndale Scoirtino,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 00-CV-145-B
--------------------
February 20, 2002
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
O’Neal Bosley (Bosley) appeals the district court’s
dismissal of his civil rights complaint based upon lack of
subject matter jurisdiction. A district court’s dismissal for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction is reviewed de novo.
Williams v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit, 242 F.3d 315, 318 (5th
Cir.), cert. denied, 122 S. Ct. 618 (2001).

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 01-30547
-2-
Federal district courts lack jurisdiction to engage in
appellate review of state-court judgments. See Dist. of Columbia
Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 476, 482 (1983);
Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 415-16 (1923). The
constitutional issues, if any, presented in Bosley’s action are
inextricably intertwined with the state court’s order nullifying
its August 4, 1998, order of dismissal. Accordingly, Bosley’s
action constituted a request that the district court review a
state court decision. See United States v. Shepherd, 23 F.3d
923, 924 (5th Cir. 1994). The district court’s dismissal of
Bosley’s complaint is therefore AFFIRMED on the ground of lack of
subject matter jurisdiction.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --