Federal Court Clerks Have Absolute Quasi-Judicial Immunity from Damages when Performing Tasks Integral to the Judicial Process unless They Act in the Clear Absence of All Jurisdiction
Cobb v. JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 2867 (9th Cir. Feb. 26, 2015):
The district court properly dismissed Cobb's claims against the federal court defendants because they are entitled to quasi-judicial immunity. See Mullis v. U.S. Bankr. Court, 828 F.2d 1385, 1390 (9th Cir. 1987) ("Court clerks have absolute quasi-judicial immunity from damages . . . when they perform tasks that are an integral part of the judicial process" unless they acted "in the clear absence of all jurisdiction."); see also Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072, 1078 (9th Cir. 1986) (en banc) ("[A]llegations that a conspiracy produced a certain decision should [*2] no more pierce the actor's immunity than allegations of bad faith, personal interest or outright malevolence.").
Share this article: