IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-30927

Summary Calendar

MILDRED JONES,

Plaintiff-Appellant 

v.

ROBIN GIARRUSSO, Orleans Parish Judge; LOUISIANA STATE, 

Defendants-Appellees 

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Louisiana 

USDC No. 2:12-CV-494

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mildred Jones filed suit claiming due process violations by Louisiana State

court judge Robin Giarrusso and by the State of Louisiana. The district court

dismissed because it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. We AFFIRM. 

The federal complaint was filed in February 2012, three years after Jones

brought suit in Louisiana state court. Current defendant Robin Giarrusso was

the state court judge. Judge Giarrusso admitted the plaintiff’s attorney-son,

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

March 21, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* 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.

 Case: 12-30927 Document: 00512183159 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/21/2013
No. 12-30927

Ricky Nelson Jones, pro hac vice in order to represent his mother. After the

defendants in that case demonstrated that Jones’s son was a necessary witness,

Judge Giarrusso applied state Bar rules to hold that the son could no longer be

the attorney in the case. Admission pro hac vice was revoked. Jones took an

interlocutory appeal. A Louisiana Court of Appeal upheld the revocation of the

attorney’s admission and affirmed the denial of Jones’s motion for summary

judgment. Jones v. Next Generation Homes, LLC, 76 So. 3d 1238 (La. App. 4th

Cir. 2011). We are unaware of any further proceedings in the state trial court.

Jones brought the current suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern

District of Louisiana, alleging that removing her attorney was a due process

violation. She sought to have her son reinstated as her attorney and the state

court action stayed pending resolution of the federal court suit, or alternatively,

the removal to federal court of the state court suit she filed in 2009.

This court reviews a district court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction de novo. Ballew v. Cont’l Airlines, Inc., 668 F.3d 777, 781 (5th Cir.

2012). The Eleventh Amendment bars citizens’ suits against a State in federal

court. Cozzo v. Tangipahoa Parish Council, 279 F.3d 273, 280 (5th Cir. 2002). 

The State of Louisiana has not waived immunity. LA. REV. STAT. ANN. §

13:5106(A) (2010). Congress has not abrogated it. See Cozzo, 279 F.3d at 281. 

The exception that allows suits against state officials for prospective injunctive

relief does not apply, as Jones seeks retroactive relief. See Pennhurst State Sch.

& Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 105-06 (1984) (citing Ex Parte Young, 209

U.S. 123 (1908)). Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to hear the suit against

Louisiana because the State retains sovereign immunity. Id.

To the extent that Jones seeks an injunction of state court proceedings,

that relief is barred by the Anti-Injunction Act. 28 U.S.C. § 2283. As to removal

2

 Case: 12-30927 Document: 00512183159 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/21/2013
No. 12-30927

of her state court suit to federal court, Jones as plaintiff has no right to remove

her own case. See 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). 

The suit against Judge Giarrusso in her official capacity is also barred as

effectively a suit against the State. Will v. Mich. Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S.

58, 71 (1989). 

AFFIRMED. 

3

 Case: 12-30927 Document: 00512183159 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/21/2013