United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT August 22, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
_____________________ Clerk
No. 05-51719
Summary Calendar
_____________________
MICHAEL J. FLORES; LEE FLORES,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
versus
MATTHEWS & BRANSCOMB; JAMES H. ROBICHAUX; JAMES CLANCEY; JEFFREY
DICKERSEN,
Defendants-Appellees.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(5:05-CV-897)
_________________________________________________________________
Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Michael and Lee Flores appeal, pro se, the dismissal of their
42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against a private law firm and three of its
members as frivolous, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. That dismissal
is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Norton v. Dimazana, 122 F.3d
286, 291 (5th Cir. 1997). Affording the pleadings and brief the
requisite liberal construction, e.g., Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d
523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995), there was no such abuse.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
First, the Floreses offer no concrete assertions of a
violation of the Constitution or federal law, nor assert any facts
to support their conclusory claim that defendants acted under the
required color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48
(1988); Mills v. Criminal Dist. Court No. 3, 837 F.2d 677, 678 (5th
Cir. 1988). In that regard, a state-law claim against the
defendant attorneys for professional misconduct is not a basis for
§ 1983 relief. See O'Brien v. Colbath, 465 F.2d 358, 359 (5th Cir.
1972); see also Baker v. McCollan, 443 U.S. 137, 146 (1979) (a §
1983 complaint is not a vehicle for vindicating rights arising
under state tort law). Finally, the Floreses offer no specific
facts to support their claim of a conspiracy between defendants and
the state court. See Young v. Biggers, 938 F.2d 565, 569 (5th Cir.
1991).
AFFIRMED
2