FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT AUGUST 27, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 14564 a nd N o. 06- 14819 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 5 - 0 1 3 2 5 - C V- T - E AJ C H R I S T O P H E R A . B R I G G S , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s K A T H R Y N A . B R I G G S , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

_______________________ A pp ea l s f

rom the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( A u gu s t 27, 2007) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B L A C K an d M A R C U S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: C hr i s t ophe rB r i ggs ( “ C hr i s t ophe r ” ) , pr oc e e di ng pr o s e , appe a l s the m agi stra t e’ s di sm i ss al of hi s 42 U . S . C . § 1 98 3 cl ai m and sup pl em ent al st at e l aw claim s a g ain st h is sister , K ath ry n B rig g s ( “K ath ry n ”) , an d th e a w ar d o f a tt o rn ey ’sThe pa rties consented to the mag istrate judg e conduc ting all procee dings in the district 1 court, pursua

nt to 28 U.S.C . § 636(c) . 2 f e e s t o K a thry n unde rF e d. R . C i v. P . 11. 1 A s a n in itia l m a tte r , C h r is to p h e rm o v e s to s tr ik e p o r tio n s o f K a th ry n ’s b r ie f

. B e c a us e K a thry n’ s br i e f i s s ubs t a nt i a l l y c om pl i a ntw i th thi s C our t ’ s rul e s , the m o t i o n i s D EN I ED . C h r is to p h e ra r g u e s o n ap p e a l th a t th e m a g is tr a te e rr e d b y d is m is s in g h is c o m p la in t. H e a s s e r ts th a t th e f a c ts f r o m h is c o m p la in t p r o v id e as u f f ic ie n t b a s is f oraf i ndi ng of a42 U . S . C . § 1983 vi ol a t i on. W e r e vi e w de novo adi s tr i c tc our t ’ s rul i ng on s um m a ry j udgm e nt , appl y i ng the s a m e l e ga l s t a nda r ds a s the c our tbe l ow . S kr t i c h v. T hornt on, 280 F . 3d 1295, 12 99 (11th C i r. 20 02 ). “ S um m ary j ud gm enti s app ropri at e onl y w hen the evi dence be f or e the c our tde m ons tr a t e s tha t‘ the r e i s no ge nui ne i s s ue of m a t e r i a l f

a c ta nd tha tthe m ovi ng pa r ty i s e nt i t l e d t o j udgm e nta s am a tt e rof l a w . ’ ” I d. ( c i t a t i on o m itte d ) . O n as u m m a ry ju d g m e n t m o tio n , th e r e c o r d , a n d a ll r e a s o n ab le in f e r e n c e s th a t c a n b e d r a w n f r o m it, m u s t b e v ie w e d in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r ab le to the no n-m ov i ng party. W hat l eyv. C N A Ins. C os. , 18 9 F . 3d 13 10 , 13 13 (11th C i r. 19 99 ). N everthel es s, concl usory a l l egat i on s bas ed on subj ec t i ve bel i ef s a re in s u f f ic ie n t to c r e a te ag e n u in e is s u e o f m a te r ia l f

a c t. L e ig h v . W a rn e rB r o s ., I n c ., 21 2 F . 3d 12 10 , 12 17 (11th C i r. 20 00 ).3

T o s uc c e e d on 42 U . S . C . § 1983 c l a i m , apa r tym us te s t abl i s h tha tthe of f e ndi ng c onduc tw a s c om m i tt e d by ape r s on a c t i ng unde rc ol orof s t a t e l a w a nd tha tthe c onduc tde pr i ve d hi m of r i ght s s e c ur e d by the C ons t i tut i on orl a w s of the U n ite d S ta te s . F u llm a n v . G r a d d ic k , 7 3 9 F .2 d 5 5 3 , 5 6 1 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 8 4 ) . A pl a i nt i f f c l a i m i ng ac ons pi r a c y unde r§ 1983 m us tm a ke pa r t i c ul a r i z e d a l l e ga t i ons tha tac ons pi r a c y e xi s t s . S e e G J R I nve s tm e nt s , I nc . v. C ounty of E s c a m bi a , 132 F .3 d 1 3 5 9 , 1 3 7 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) . A p r iv a te p a r ty c a n b e v ie w e d a s a“s ta te a c to r ” f o r§ 1 9 8 3 p u rp o s e s “[ o ]n ly in r a r e c ir c u m s ta n c e s .” H a rv e y v . H a rv e y , 9 4 9 F .2 d 1 1 2 7 , 1 1 3 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 2 ) . U n d er 4 2 U . S . C . § 1 9 8 3 , l i ab i l i ty att ach es o n l y t o th o se w ro n g d o ers “ w h o carry a b a d g e o f a u th o r ityo f

aS ta te a n d r e p r e s e n t it in s o m e c ap a c ity , w h e th e rth e y a c t in a c c or da nc e w i th the i ra uthor i ty orm i s us e i t . ” N a t ’ l C ol l e gi a t e A th. A s s ’ n. v. T a rka ni a n, 488 U . S . 179, 191, 109 S . C t . 454, 461- 62, 102 L . E d. 2d 469 ( 1988) ( c i t a t i ons om i tt e d) . “ M i s us e of pow e r , pos s e s s e d by vi r tue of s t a t e l a w a nd m a de p o s s ib le o n ly b e c a u s e th e w r o n g d o e ris c lo th e d w ith th e a u th o r ity o f s ta te la w , is a c tio n ta k e n ‘u n d e rc o lo ro f s ta te la w .’” I d . ( c ita tio n s o m itte d ) . A s t a t e a c t orm a y notbe he l d vi c a r i ous l y l i abl e f ori t s § 1983 c l a i m s a r i s i ng fr o m em p lo ye e c o n d u ct, b u t m ay b e h eld li ab le if th e v io lati o n o f th e p lain ti ff’s ri gh t s i s a ttri bu t abl e t o the ent i ty’ s pol i cyor cust om . M on el l v. D ep' t . of S oci al4

S ervs. , 43 6 U . S . 65 8, 69 0-91 , 98 S . C t . 20 18 , 20 35 -36, 56 L . E d. 2d 61 1 (19 78 ); s e e a l s o H a rve y , 949 F . 2d a t1129- 30 ( e xt e ndi ng M one l l pr ohi bi t i on of vi c a r i ous l i abi l i ty t o p ri vat e a ct ors a ct i ng un der c ol or of st at e l aw ). B ec ause C hri st op her f

ai l ed t o ass ertany f

ac t s or m ake “ part i cul ar i ze d a l l e ga t i ons ” s uppor t i ng the e s s e nt i a l e l e m e nt s of a42 U . S . C . § 1983 c l a i m , the ma g i s tr a t e d i d n o te rri n d i s mi s s i n g th e c l a i m. C hr i s t ophe rne xta r gue s tha tthe m a gi s tr a t e e rr e d i n de t e rm i ni ng tha tthe am ou nti n con trovers y w as l es s than $ 75 , 00 0. H e a ss ert s thatthe al l egedl y s t ol en ite m s h a d av a lu e o f

$ 8 1 ,4 0 0 , a n d th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t h a d d iv e r s ity ju r is d ic tio n to a d ju d ic a te h is s ta te la w c la im s . W e r e vi e w de novo the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s di s m i s s a l of ac om pl a i ntf

orl a c k of s ubj e c t - m a tt e rj ur i s di c t i on. S a m c o G l oba l A rm s , I nc . v. A r i t a , 395 F . 3d 1212, 12 14 n. 4 (11 C i r. 20 05 ). T he m agi stra t e’ s f i nd i ng of l ac k o f s ubj ec t -m att er th j ur i s di c t i on w a s e m bodi e d i n a n or de rgr a nt i ng the de f e nda nt ’ s m ot i on f

or s um m a ry j udgm e nt . S ubj e c t - m a tt e rj ur i s di c t i on i s appr opr i a t e l y de a l tw i th by m e a ns of am ot i on t o di s m i s s unde rF e d. R . C i v. P . 12( b) ( 1) , a nd w e w i l l tr e a tthe di s tr i c tc our t ’ s s um m a ry j udgm e ntrul i ng a s i f i tw e r e arul i ng on aR ul e 12( b) ( 1) m o tio n . S e e T r o ia n o v . S u p e rv is o ro f E le c tio n s , 3 8 2 F .3 d 1 2 7 6 , 1 2 7 8 n .2 ( 2 0 0 4 ) . D i ve r s i ty j ur i s di c t i on e xi s t s i f “ the m a tt e ri n c ontr ove r s y e xc e e ds the s um or5

va l ue of $75, 000, e xc l us i ve of

i nt e r e s ta nd c os t s , a nd i s be tw e e n c i t i z e ns of di ff er entS t at es . ” 28 U . S . C . § 1 33 2(a) (1). A pl ai nt i ff’ s c as e w i l l on l y be di sm i ss ed for f ai l i ng t o m ee tthe j uri sdi ct i on al m i ni m um am ou nti n con trovers y i f “ i tappears t o a l egal ce rt ai nty the pl ai nt i ff’ s c l ai m i s a ctual l y f or l es s than the j uri sdi ct i on al a m o u n t.” B u rn s v . W in d s o rI n s . C o ., 3 1 F .3 d 1 0 9 2 , 1 0 9 4 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 4 ) . W e r e v ie w th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s f in d in g s o f

ju r is d ic tio n a l f

a c ts f o rc le a re rr o r . S c a r f o v. G i ns be r g, 175 F . 3d 957, 960 ( 11th C i r . 1999) . I n af a c tua l a tt a c k on j ur i s di c t i on, s uc h a s i n thi s c a s e , the di s tr i c tc our tm a y c ons i de rm a tt e r s out s i de the pl ea di ng s, and the pres um pt i on of truthful ness no rm al l y a ff orded a pl ai nt i ff

un der R u le 1 2 ( b ) ( 1 ) d o e s n o t ap p ly . L a w r e n c e v . D u n b a r , 9 1 9 F .2 d 1 5 2 5 , 1 5 2 9 ( 1 1 th C i r. 19 90 ). B e c a us e K a thry n pr ovi de d r e l i abl e e vi de nc e tha tC hr i s t ophe r ’ s a s s e s s m e nt o f th e v a l u e o f

h i s a l l e g e d l y s t o l e n i t e m s wa s b a s e d e n t i r e l y o n h i s o wn un supp ort ed val uat i on of them , the m agi stra t e c ou l d fi nd w i th l egal ce rt ai nty that th e to ta l v a lu e o f

th e ite m s d id n o t ap p r o a c h $ 7 5 ,0 0 0 . C hr i s t ophe ra l s o a r gue s tha tthe m a gi s tr a t e abus e d he rdi s c r e t i on w he n s he ordered R ul e 11 sanct i on s a gai nsthi m . H e a ss ert s thathi s und er l yi ng cl ai m w as n o t f r iv o lo u s a n d th a t h is lim ite d ab ility to p a y s h o u ld h a v e b e e n ac o n s id e r a tio n in th e c o u r t’s a s s e s s m e n t o f a tto rn e y ’s f

e e s .We de c lin eto entertain C hristop her’ s a rgument t hat th edis tric t c ourt

erre d in failingto 2 c on sider his a

bil ity to p ay thesanc tio ne d amou

nt, be c a us etheargument w a s raise d f or thefirs t time on appeal and no exception to our usual rule is appa rent. SeeNarey

v. Dea n, 32 F.3d 1521, 1526-27 (11th Cir. 1994) (setting for th exception to the general rule that arguments raised f or the first time on appeal will not be entertaine d). 6 A di s tr i c tc our t ’ s a w a r d of s a nc t i ons unde rR ul e 11 i s r e vi e w e d f orabus e of di s c r e t i on. M a s s e nga l e v. R a y , 267 F . 3d 1298, 1301 ( 11th C i r . 2001) . R ul e 11 p e rmi t s i mp o s i n g s a n c t i o n s o n a n a tt o rn e y , l a w f i rm, o rp a r ty a s th e c o u r td e e ms appr opr i a t e . F e d. R . C i v. P . 11( c ) . R ul e 11 s a nc t i ons a r e appr opr i a t e ( 1) w he n a p arty fi l es a p l ead i n g th ath as n o reaso n ab l e factu al b asi s; (2 ) w h en th e p arty fi l es a pl e a di ng tha ti s ba s e d on al e ga l the ory w i th no r e a s onabl e c ha nc e of s uc c e s s a nd tha tc a nnotbe a dva nc e d a s ar e a s onabl e a r gum e ntt o c ha nge e xi s t i ng l a w ; or( 3) w hen the party f

i l es a pl ea di ng i n b ad fa i th for an i m prop erpu rpose. M as se ng al e, 26 7 F . 3d at13 01 . T he rul e i s i nt ended t o d et eri m prop erl i t i gat i on t ec hn i qu es , such a s de l a y a nd ba d f

a i th. F e d. R . C i v. P . 11, 1983 A dvi s ory C om m i tt e e not e s . T he s a nc t i on m us tbe e nough t o de t e rr e pe t i t i on of the s a m e c onduc ta nd m a y c ons i s tof m one t a ry ornon- m one t a ry da m a ge s pa i d t o the c our tor , i f appr opr i a t e , t o the o p p o s in g p a r ty in th e f

o rm o f a tto rn e y s ’ f

e e s . F e d .R .C iv .P . 1 1 ( c ) ( 2 ) . W h e n th e d is tr ic t c o u r t o r d e r s s a n c tio n s , it m u s t d e s c r ib e th e c o n d u c t it d et erm i n ed w arran t ed san ct i o n s. F ed . R . C i v . P . 1 1 (c)(3 ); R i ccard v . P ru d en t i al In s. C o. , 307 F . 3d 1277, 1295 ( 11th C i r . 2002) . B e c a us e C hr i s t ophe rf i l e d apl e a di ng 27

th a t h a d n o f

a c tu a l b a s is , a n d h e f

ile d th e p le a d in g f

o rth e p u rp o s e o f

h a r a s s in g h is si st eras partof an on go i ng fa m i l y di sa gree m ent , R ul e 11 sanct i on s w er e ap p r o p r ia te . A c c o r d i n g l y , th e d i s tr i c tc o u r tma g i s tr a t e ’ s d i s mi s s a l o f Ch r i s t o p h e r ’ s c l a i ms an d th e i m p o si t i o n o f san ct i o n s i s A FFI R M ED .