Case ID: f-appx_308/html/0582-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Joanne BOYD, Appellant v. WACHOVIA BANK NA; Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia Orphan’s Court.
    No. 08-3485.
    United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
    Submitted for Possible Summary Action Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6 Jan. 23, 2009.
    Opinion Filed Jan. 28, 2009.
    Joanne Boyd, Norristown, PA, pro se.
    Before: SLOVITER, FUENTES and JORDAN, Circuit Judges.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Joanne Boyd, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, naming Wachovia Bank and the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia, Orphans’ Court as defendants. Appellant alleged that the Superior Court of Pennsylvania and the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia violated her constitutional rights by failing to follow certain Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure during the course of proceedings she initiated to challenge Wachovia Bank’s final account of Appellant’s son’s finances in its role as Guardian of his estate. The District Court granted Appellant in forma pauperis status and dismissed her complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We agree with the District Court that the state courts, as state entities, are entitled to immunity from suit in federal court pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment. See Benn v. First Judicial Dist. of Pa., 426 F.3d 233, 240-41 (3d Cir.2005). Appellant fails to allege any claims against Wachovia Bank in the instant action. Accordingly, we conclude that this appeal presents no “substantial question,” and will summarily affirm the judgment of the District Court. See 3d Cir. LAR 27.4 & I.O.P. 10.6. Appellant’s motions to expand the District Court record, for leave to correct clerical mistakes, and for leave to file a revised notice of appeal are denied.