Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca11-13-12501/USCOURTS-ca11-13-12501-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 13-12501

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 6:13-cv-00367-CEH-DAB

GLORIA J. HOEGH, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

EMERSON R. THOMPSON, 

Judge, Ninth Judicial Circuit Court for Orange County, FL, 

CYNTHIA Z. MACKINNON, 

Judge, Ninth Judicial Circuit for Orange County, FL, 

WILLIAM D. PALMER, 

Judge, Fifth District Court of Appeals, 

VINCENT G. TORPY, JR., 

Judge, Fifth District Court of Appeals, 

KERRY I. EVANDER, 

Judge, Fifth District Court of Appeals, 

 Defendants - Appellees.

USCA11 Case: 13-12501 Date Filed: 01/05/2015 Page: 1 of 3
2

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(January 5, 2015)

Before WILSON, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Gloria Hoegh brought a complaint in the United StatesDistrict Court for the 

Middle District of Florida against a number of Florida state circuit and district 

judges (Defendants), styled as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Hoegh sought review of 

the conduct of a state court foreclosure action brought by Credit-Based Asset 

Servicing and Securitization, LLC, expressly referencing a provision of the Florida 

Constitution that she believes was violated by Defendants. The district court 

dismissed the complaint after concluding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction 

under Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., which holds that a district court does not have 

jurisdiction to review judgments of state courts of competent jurisdiction based on 

purported constitutional violations. See 263 U.S. 413, 415–16, 44 S. Ct. 149, 150

(1923).

We review dismissal of a complaint by the district court for lack of subject 

matter jurisdiction de novo. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Fla. v. United States, 

USCA11 Case: 13-12501 Date Filed: 01/05/2015 Page: 2 of 3
3

EPA, 105 F.3d 599, 602 (11th Cir. 1997). The district court properly applied 

Rooker and therefore did not err. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal.

AFFIRMED.

USCA11 Case: 13-12501 Date Filed: 01/05/2015 Page: 3 of 3