Abor v. Russell

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

MICHEALA ABOR, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Civil Action No. 3:25-CV-245-L-BW § STEPHEN JOSEPH RUSSELL, et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER

On June 17, 2025, the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”) (Doc. 15) was entered, recommending that the court sua sponte dismiss without prejudice this action by pro se Plaintiff Micheala Abor for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because it is barred by Rooker-Feldman doctrine,* and her claims against Judge Russel are also barred by judicial immunity. In light of this jurisdictional recommendation, the magistrate judge further recommends that the court deny as moot the Motion to Dismiss filed by Judge Russell (Doc. 8). No objections to the Report were filed, and the deadline for doing so has expired. Having considered the Report, pleadings, file, record in this case, and Report, the court determines that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct, and accepts them as those of the court. The court, therefore, sua sponte dismisses without prejudice this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because it is barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, and Plaintiff’s claims against Judge Russel are also barred by judicial immunity. Further, given the

* Under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, a federal district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review a final state court decision arising out of a judicial proceeding unless a federal statute specifically authorizes such review. District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 486 (1983) (Federal courts lack jurisdiction “over challenges to state court decisions . . . arising out of judicial proceedings even if those challenges allege that the state court’s action was unconstitutional.”); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 414-16 (1923) (holding that federal district courts do not have appellate jurisdiction to reverse or modify judgment of state court). court’s determination that it lacks jurisdiction over this action, it denies as moot the Motion to Dismiss filed by Judge Russell (Doc. 8). It is so ordered this 2nd day of July, 2025.

a Sam A. Lindsay C United States District Judge

Order — Page 2