Court Opinion

ID: 9403016
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-20 00:00:54.703988+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:03.854069
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-30027         Document: 00516791552             Page: 1      Date Filed: 06/19/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit

                                                                                       FILED
                                       No. 23-30027                                June 19, 2023
                                     Summary Calendar
                                     ____________                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                       Clerk
   Alka Pittman, on behalf of minor children T.C. and A.C.
   (biological Indigenous children) As Members of Tchou Tchouma
   Tchoupitoulas Nation,

                                                                     Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                             versus

   22nd Judicial District Court, St. Tammany Parish;
   Department of Revenue State of Louisiana, Office of
   Child Support,

                                               Defendants—Appellees.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Eastern District of Louisiana
                               USDC No. 2:22-CV-2242
                      ______________________________

   Before Duncan, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Alka A. Pittman moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP)
   on appeal of the dismissal of her federal civil action for lack of subject matter

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-30027        Document: 00516791552             Page: 2      Date Filed: 06/19/2023

                                         No. 23-30027

   jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). The district court ruled that
   Pittman’s lawsuit collaterally attacking a Louisiana court’s custody and child
   support orders was barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. 1 It denied
   Pittman IFP status, certifying that her appeal would not be taken in good
   faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).
           Our inquiry into Pittman’s good faith “is limited to whether the
   appeal involves legal points arguable on their merits.” Howard v. King, 707
   F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
   The Rooker-Feldman doctrine “directs that federal district courts lack
   jurisdiction to entertain collateral attacks on state court judgments.” Liedtke
   v. State Bar of Texas, 18 F.3d 315, 317 (5th Cir. 1994). Pittman’s civil action
   satisfies all four conditions for applying Rooker-Feldman. See Burciaga v.
   Deutsche Bank Nat’l Tr. Co., 871 F.3d 380, 384 (5th Cir. 2017). Although
   Rooker-Feldman does not bar federal court review of “independent claims”
   for injuries that do not “aris[e] from the [state court] judgment” itself,
   Truong v. Bank of Am., N.A., 717 F.3d 377, 383 (5th Cir. 2013), Pittman has
   not identified any such claim.
           Because Pittman’s appeal lacks arguable merit, her motion to proceed
   IFP is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh,
   117 F.3d at 202 & n.24.

           _____________________
           1
             Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923); District of Columbia Court of
   Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983).

                                                   2