Background
The plaintiff appealed a district court dismissal of her complaint under twenty-eight U.S.C. Section one thousand nine hundred fifteen, subsection (e)(two)(B) for failure to state a claim. She sought to proceed in forma pauperis, which constituted a challenge to the district court’s certification that her appeal was not taken in good faith.
The court’s reasoning
The court held that the filing of documents and actions taken during representation fell within the scope of an attorney’s duties and were entitled to immunity. Regarding the Section nineteen eighty-three claim, the court found the plaintiff’s argument conclusory and insufficient to show the defendant was a state actor or that there was a conspiracy with state officials. The court also determined that allowing the plaintiff to file an amended complaint would have been futile.
What it means going forward
The appeal was dismissed as frivolous, and the plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis was denied.