Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Rhonda REID, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Candace LAWSON, Greene County Tax Commissioner, Camille Hope, Bankruptcy Trustee, Stephen Bradley, DA, Donnie Harrison, Sheriff, Rene Mathew, State Revenue et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Rhonda Reid, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's dismissal of her pro se second amended complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, and several immunity grounds.
Arguments not raised on appeal, even by pro se litigants, are deemed abandoned. Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008). An appellant also abandons a claim when: (1) she makes only passing reference to it; (2) she raises it in a “perfunctory manner without supporting arguments and authority”; (3) she refers to it only in the “statement of the case” or “summary of the argument”; or (4) the references to the issue are mere background to her main arguments. Sapuppo v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co., 739 F.3d 678, 681-82 (11th Cir. 2014).
Reid has not raised any arguments in her brief attacking the merits of the district court's order and has therefore abandoned those arguments on appeal. See Timson, 518 F.3d at 874. Even liberally construed, Reid reiterates only the allegations in her second amended complaint and the procedural history in the district court, without addressing the findings and supporting reasoning by the district court as to any of its stated grounds for dismissal. See Sapuppo, 739 F.3d at 681-82. Therefore, because Reid makes only passing references to the district court's order and otherwise raises it in a “perfunctory manner without supporting arguments and authority,” she has abandoned any assertion the district court's order was erroneous. Id.; Timson, 518 F.3d at 874. Accordingly, we affirm the district court.
AFFIRMED.
PER CURIAM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 20-12350
Decided: February 24, 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)