USCA1 Opinion
May 18, 1993 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
___________________
No. 92-2188
BERENICE MARY GORCZAKOSKI,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
MASSACHUSETTS COMMISSION
AGAINST DISCRIMINATION,
Defendant, Appellee.
__________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Rya W. Zobel, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
___________________
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
______________
___________________
Berenice Mary Gorczakoski on brief pro se.
_________________________
George P. Napolitano, General Counsel, Massachusetts
________________________
Commission Against Discrimination, on brief for appellee.
__________________
__________________
Per Curiam. We find no abuse of discretion in the
___________
district court's dismissal of the instant complaint as
"frivolous" under 28 U.S.C. 1915(d). See, e.g., Denton v.
___ ____ ______
Hernandez, 112 S. Ct. 1728, 1734 (1992) ( 1915(d) dismissal
_________
properly reviewed for abuse of discretion); Neitzke v.
_______
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989) (complaint is frivolous
________
"where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact");
Watson v. Caton, 984 F.2d 537, 539 (1st Cir. 1993). To the
______ _____
extent plaintiff seeks review of defendant's finding of "no
probable cause," see Mass. G.L. c. 151B, 5-6, 9, the
___
district court plainly lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
And to the extent plaintiff seeks damages under 42 U.S.C.
1983 on account of (1) defendant's allegedly improper
processing of her claim or (2) its reaction to her office
visit in February 1992, it is clear that defendant is immune
under the Eleventh Amendment. See, e.g., Johnson v.
___ ____ _______
Rodriguez, 943 F.2d 104, 108-09 (1st Cir. 1991), cert.
_________ _____
denied, 112 S. Ct. 948 (1992).
______
Nor does it appear that the deficiencies in plaintiff's
complaint "could be remedied through more specific pleading."
Denton, 112 S. Ct. at 1734. In Johnson, a case involving
______ _______
similar contentions against this same defendant, we held that
alleged improprieties in the handling of a grievance failed
to implicate a due process interest. 943 F.2d at 109-10; see
___
also Francis-Sobel v. University of Maine, 597 F.2d 15, 17-18
____ _____________ ___________________
-2-
(1st Cir.) (EEOC finding of no reasonable cause does not give
rise to constitutional claim), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 949
_____________
(1979). And plaintiff's allegations as to her treatment by
unidentified personnel in defendant's office--conclusory
allegations which have received no elaboration on appeal--
fall well short of stating a constitutional violation. See
___
Watson, 984 F.2d at 540 ("The difference between failing to
______
state a claim and making a frivolous claim is in some
situations a question of degree.").
Affirmed.
_________
-3-