Larrew v. Barnes

87 F. App'x 407

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: February 17, 2004
• Docket: 03-10543
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM. *

Stephen James Larrew filed an action under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq., accusing various state court judges, family court masters, the attorney general and his assistants, the attorney who represented his ex-wife in their divorce proceedings and ensuing litigation, the State Bar of Texas (“SBT”), and the American Bar Association (“ABA”) of fraudulently depriving him of his money and his business. Finding that Larrew’s RICO claim was inextricably intertwined with his claim alleging that his divorce decree was invalid, the district court dismissed the action for lack of subject matter under the Rooker-Feldman ** doctrine. Larrew’s motion for disqualification of the judges of this court based on their alleged membership in the ABA is DENIED. See In re City of Houston, 745 F.2d 925, 929 n. 8 (5th Cir.1984).

In his opening brief on appeal, Larrew argues only that the district court erroneously dismissed the ABA as a party defendant because he had not properly and timely effected service of process. By failing to brief the issue whether the district court correctly dismissed his action under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, Larrew has abandoned that issue. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972); Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir.1993); United States v. Prince, 868 F.2d 1379, 1386 (5th Cir.1989); Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987). Thus, the judgment of the district court dismissing Larrew’s RICO action is AFFIRMED.

We GRANT the SBT’s motion and award the SBT its reasonable costs expended on this appeal. Fed. R.App. P. 39(a)(2). The SBT is directed to file a verified bill of costs and an affidavit of reasonable expenses with the Clerk of Court within 14 days after entry of judgment. See Fed. R.App. P. 39.

MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION DENIED; JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; APPELLEE DIRECTED TO FILE BILL OF COSTS AND AFFIDAVIT OF REASONABLE EXPENSES.

* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

** Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 44 S.Ct. 149, 68 L.Ed. 362 (1923); District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983).