# Swanson v. Brown County Sheriff Dept

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · October 1, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11153496

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** October 1, 2025
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Nature of suit:** Civil Rights
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11153496

## Opinion text

Case: 24-11052 Document: 50-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/01/2025

United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
____________
United States Court of Appeals
No. 24-11052 Fifth Circuit

Summary Calendar FILED
____________ October 1, 2025
Lyle W. Cayce
Susan Swanson, Clerk

Plaintiff—Appellant,

versus

Brown County Sheriff Department;
Brownwood Police Department;
Brown County of Court at Law;
Brown County Appraisal District; Brookesmith SUD;
City of Brownwood, Texas; Brownwood Public Library;
Brownwood Area Chamber of Commerce;
Steven Haynes, Attorney; Mark Bessent, Attorney;
Christoper Mitchell, Attorney; Sam Moss, Judge,

Defendants—Appellees.
______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:24-CV-47
______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*

_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 24-11052 Document: 50-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/01/2025

No. 24-11052

The plaintiff, pro se, sued numerous public and private parties per
42 U.S.C. § 1983. Her complaint is replete with rambling incoherence. She
claims collusion among, inter alia, attorneys, the mayor, and a judge by means
such as cyberwarfare and computer crimes. At one point in her brief, she
claims “the theft of assets totaling approximately 500,000,000.00 dollars’
worth of digital assets, slander and pornographic videos published on the
world wide web, and television, totaling into the thousands, and continuing
accumulations to this day.”
The district properly dismissed with prejudice, finding that the “law-
suit is brought for the purpose of harassing the defendants. It is a malicious
lawsuit premised upon claims which are frivolous and without merit [and] is
abusive of the civil justice system.”
Plaintiff’s appeal is frivolous. The judgment of dismissal is
AFFIRMED.

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11153496. Public record. Not legal advice.