Izik Aliya v. State of Florida

── Izik Aliya v. State of Florida ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: June 04, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 25-10477 Document: 93-1 Date Filed: 06/04/2026 Page: 1 of 8 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-10477 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ IZIK ALIYA, individually and as guardian for A.A., a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus STATE OF FLORIDA, DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, BROWARD COUNTY UNIFIED FAMILY COURT, 17th Judicial Circuit Court, CHIEF JUDGE OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, in his official capacity, JUDGE STEPHANIE MOON, in her official capacity as Circuit Court Judge, et al., Defendants-Appellees. USCA11 Case: 25-10477 Document: 93-1 Date Filed: 06/04/2026 Page: 2 of 8 2 Opinion of the Court 25-10477 ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 0:24-cv-62147-DSL ____________________ Before NEWSOM, BRANCH, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Izik Aliya appeals the district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his civil rights complaint as an impermissible shotgun pleading. He argues that the district court erred in concluding that the complaint was a shotgun pleading and that amendment would be futile because all of Aliya’s claims were otherwise barred by sovereign immunity, judicial immunity, prosecutorial immunity, or an abstention doctrine. After review, we affirm. I. Background Izik, proceeding pro se, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint against 26 defendants, including the State of Florida and several of its courts, Florida judges and judicial assistants, Florida prosecutors and the State Attorney’s Office, the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and a detective employed there, a personal injury law firm and its affiliated attorneys that represented the mother of his child in a child custody proceeding, a guardian ad litem, and a private psychiatrist. He alleged in a vague and conclusory manner that each of these entities and individuals violated his constitutional rights in various ways during child custody proceedings and other domestic relations proceedings. He did not set forth separate counts or causes of action in the complaint. Instead, he set forth USCA11 Case: 25-10477 Document: 93-1 Date Filed: 06/04/2026 Page: 3 of 8 25-10477 Opinion of the Court 3 generalized conclusory allegations against the defendants. For example, he alleged that there was “systemic exploitation” in Florida’s judicial system that “target[ed] vulnerable groups, such as pro se litigants, fathers, and individuals involved in domestic violence cases.” And that the “judiciary’s repeated misconduct, bias, and unconstitutional actions have denied [him] the opportunity to maintain a meaningful parental relationship with his daughter.” As to the state judge defendants, he generally alleged without further detail that they were biased against him and had engaged in judicial misconduct and violated his constitutional rights via va