La. R.S. 3:24, §§ 3:3804(C) and (D), 3809. 5 . See, La. R.S. § 3:3802(B)(2). 6 . See, Plaintiffs Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Rec. Doc. No. 33, p. 1. 7 . See, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, p. 4. 8 . Lowrey v. Texas A & M Univ. Sys., 117 F.3d 242, 247 (5th Cir.1997). 9 . Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957); Blackburn v. City of Marshall, 42 F.3d 925, 931 (5th Cir.1995). 10 . Baker v. Putnal, 75 F.3d 190, 196 (5th Cir.1996). 11 . Baker, 75 F.3d at 196; Spivey v. Robertson, 197 F.3d 772, 774 (5th Cir.1999), rehearing denied, 530 U.S. 1229, 120 S.Ct. 2659, 147 L.Ed.2d 274 (2000). 12 . Lowrey, 117 F.3d at 247. 13 . Guidry v. Bank of LaPlace, 954 F.2d 278, 281 (5th Cir.1992). 14 . See Jacquez v. Procunier, 801 F.2d 789, 792-93 (5th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>); Morrison v. City of Baton Rouge, 761 F.2d
holding that the proper ground for dismissal of a  1983 action in which the plaintiff has failed to establish state action is lack of jurisdiction holding that when plaintiff has proven injury but has failed to prove the amount of damages the plaintiff is only entitled to nominal damages holding that dismissal of a pro se complaint for failure to state a claim should generally be without prejudice but if the plaintiff has been given an opportunity amend his complaint and fails to do so the dismissal may be with prejudice recognizing that although the plaintiff attempted to make a claim under section 310 the plaintiff failed to establish the element of duty required to sustain that claim recognizing that dismissal is required if a plaintiff has had fair opportunity to make his case but has failed