Oza B. Jenkins v. Ronald C. Dresnick , 147 F. App'x 67 ( 2005 )

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
AUGUST 23, 2005
No. 05-11215 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 04-22179-CV-FAM
OZA B. JENKINS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
RONALD C. DRESNICK,
11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(August 23, 2005)
Before HULL, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Oza Jenkins appeals pro se the dismissal of her section 1983 complaint,
which was dismissed as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. section 1915. We affirm.
Jenkins is a frequent pro se litigant in the state and federal trial courts of
Florida. This appeal concerns three of her cases: the case that is the basis of this
appeal and two cases Jenkins brought in state court. In the first state case, Jenkins
sued two cell phone companies on theories of products liability and personal
injury. That case was removed to federal court and later remanded to Judge
Dresnick in state court. During the intervening time between when the first case
was removed and remanded, Jenkins had a verbal altercation with Judge Dresnick
during the proceedings of her second state case. After that altercation, she moved
to recuse Dresnick in the second state case, and her motion was granted. She
contended in her motion to recuse that Dresnick was abusive toward her because of
her race and disability. She has also stated that Dresnick caused her to overdose on
prescription medications because of his outburst. Jenkins’s complaint in the
second state case was later dismissed.
Jenkins filed a motion to recuse Dresnick in the first state case after he
recused himself in the second state case. Her motion was denied, and her
complaint was dismissed. Jenkins then sued Dresnick and the Eleventh Judicial
Circuit Court of Florida in federal court. Jenkins alleged that Dresnick violated her
due process rights and the Americans with Disabilities Act when he did not recuse
in the first state case. Jenkins seeks a $60 billion damages award and injunctive
2
relief.
A district court shall dismiss a complaint filed in forma pauperis if the
complaint is “frivolous or malicious.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). “A claim is
frivolous if it is without arguable merit either in law of fact.” Bilal v. Driver, 251
F.3d 1346, 1349 (11th Cir. 2001). The district court dismissed Jenkins’s
complaint, under section 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), for the following two reasons: (1)
Jenkins did not allege any facts to support a claim against the state court and (2)
Dresnick was entitled to absolute judicial immunity because the claims against him
were based on his denial of a motion to recuse. Our review is for abuse of
discretion, Bilal, 251 F.3d at 1349, and we conclude that the district court did not
abuse its discretion.
AFFIRMED.
3