Quasi-Judicial Immunity

177 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Bradford v. Metro. Dade Cnty.
  522 So. 2d 96· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-03-22 ·cited 8×
  Andrea Bradford sued Metropolitan Dade County for negligence after being attacked by a mentally disturbed woman who had disappeared from a county-monitored residential facility. The court affirmed judgment for the county, holding that law enforcement and the county's mental healt
• Mills v. Killebrew
  765 F.2d 69· 6th Cir.· 1985-06-11 ·cited 8×
  Mediators are entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity from damages claims, even if the underlying mediation rule is later found unconstitutional, as they did not act in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.
• Ernest W. Ballou in Bankr. for Va. Prestressed Concrete Corp. v. Basic Constr. Co.
  407 F.2d 1137· 4th Cir.· 1969-03-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defenses of substantial performance, impossibility, and estoppel were not applicable to excuse the subcontractor's breach of contract, and that the architects and hospital were immune from suit for their actions.
• Hill v. Suwannee River Water Mgmt. Dist.
  217 So. 3d 1100· Fla. 1st DCA· 2017-04-18 ·cited 7×
  The Hills appealed summary judgment dismissing their takings claim against the Suwannee River Water Management District on quasi-judicial immunity grounds. The court reversed, holding that the District's actions in draining the Hills' pond pursuant to court orders were not judici
• Sultenfuss v. Snow
  894 F.2d 1277· 11th Cir.· 1990-02-20 ·cited 7×
  The court held that while parole board members are immune from damages claims, the sua sponte dismissal of the due process claim for equitable relief was improper because the revised Georgia parole system raises an arguable legal question regarding a liberty interest.
• Cowart v. Duro
  2023 WL 5069482· M.D. Fla.· 2024-10-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint contained numerous deficiencies, including failure to state a claim, improper citation of statutes, and claims barred by immunity doctrines, requiring a second amended complaint.
• Moore v. Dep't of Corr.
  833 So. 2d 822· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-12-04 ·cited 6×
  Probation supervision is a discretionary category II government function involving enforcement of laws and protection of public safety that does not give rise to a common law duty of care to individual probationers, and filing an affidavit regarding a probation violation or faili
• Harris v. Bush
  106 F. Supp. 2d 1272· N.D. Fla.· 2000-07-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against most defendants due to lack of pleading, immunity, or Eleventh Amendment bar, and also failed to state a claim for declaratory relief.
• Kincaid v. Kendall I. Vail
  969 F.2d 594· 7th Cir.· 1992-08-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the clerk of court was entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity for actions taken at the direction of a judge, and that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact regarding a constitutional violation.
• Bryant v. O'Connor
  848 F.2d 1064· 10th Cir.· 1988-06-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment because the appellant failed to provide specific facts to support his allegations of racial discrimination and racial conspiracy, and his discovery requests were insufficient.
• Schlette v. Burdick
  633 F.2d 920· 9th Cir.· 1980-12-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was no triable issue of fact regarding the constitutionality of the plaintiff's confinement, entitling the conservators to summary judgment.
• Hevelone v. Thomas
  546 F.2d 797· 8th Cir.· 1976-12-27 ·cited 6×
• Timson v. Wright
  532 F.2d 552· 6th Cir.· 1976-03-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 were insufficient and that the defendant officials were protected by judicial or quasi-judicial immunity.
• Curry v. Jensen
  523 F.2d 387· 9th Cir.· 1975-08-27 ·cited 6×
  Prosecutors are immune from civil rights claims for actions within the judicial process, and a judge's refusal to disqualify himself was proper absent specific facts showing bias.
• Mills v. L. K. Small, M.D.
  446 F.2d 249· 9th Cir.· 1971-08-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's civil rights action was barred by the statute of limitations and that the defendant was immune from liability due to his quasi-judicial role.
• MEE v. Ortega
  967 F.2d 423· 10th Cir.· 1992-06-18 ·cited 5×
  Parole officers are entitled to qualified immunity, not absolute immunity, for decisions to detain parolees pending revocation hearings, and supervisors are not liable without a showing of personal involvement.
• Kimberly Regenesis, LLC v. Lee Cnty.
  64 F.4th 1253· 11th Cir.· 2023-04-10 ·cited 4×
  The county and commissioner cannot appeal the denial of quasi-judicial immunity because the county lacks appellate standing and the commissioner was not a party to the case and did not participate in the district court proceedings.
• Marks v. State
  937 So. 2d 1211· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-09-20 ·cited 4×
  The Markses appealed a trial court's denial of attorney's fees for defending a criminal RICO action, after the court awarded fees for a dismissed civil RICO action. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Florida's RICO statute provides for attorney's fees recovery only in civ
• Gregory v. United States/United States Bankr. Court for the Dist. of Colo.
  942 F.2d 1498· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that judicial and governmental defendants are immune from suit, and the bankruptcy trustee is also immune for actions taken in execution of court orders.
• McCURRY v. Tesch
  738 F.2d 271· 8th Cir.· 1984-06-29 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the law enforcement officers were acting in obedience to court orders and should be afforded absolute immunity from damages liability.
• Burnett v. McNABB
  565 F.2d 398· 6th Cir.· 1977-11-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Beer Board members were immune from suit because they acted in good faith in their quasi-judicial capacity. The court also held that there was no pendent federal jurisdiction under the cited Tennessee statute.
• Kalec v. Adamowski
  406 F.2d 536· 7th Cir.· 1969-01-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint as a substitute for habeas corpus, but affirmed the dismissal because the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• Rindley v. Gallagher
  890 F. Supp. 1540· S.D. Fla.· 1995-06-21 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Board Member defendants are entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity and qualified immunity for their actions, except for Defendant Bliss. The court also found that the plaintiff has standing to bring claims for selective enforcement and that the statu
• Morton v. City OF Little Rock
  934 F.2d 180· 8th Cir.· 1991-05-30 ·cited 3×
  The court held that claims against the City and Wilson were time-barred, and the claims against Gatewood were barred by qualified immunity and failure to establish municipal policy.
• Wilcox v. Bennett H. Brummer
  739 So. 2d 1282· Fla. 3d DCA· 1999-09-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the doctrine of quasi-judicial immunity does not preclude a malpractice suit against the public defender's office.
• Bobby Watts, M.D. v. John H. Burkhart, M.D.
  978 F.2d 269· 6th Cir.· 1992-10-28 ·cited 2×
  The dissent argues that qualified immunity, not absolute judicial immunity, is the appropriate standard for state medical licensing boards under Section 1983.
• Whiting v. Kirk
  960 F.2d 248· 1st Cir.· 1992-03-30 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge believes the officials' actions were not objectively reasonable, despite the majority's reliance on qualified immunity.
• Antoine v. Byers & Anderson, Inc.
  950 F.2d 1471· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-13 ·cited 2×
  A court reporter is entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity for acts performed within the scope of their duties, and this immunity extends to their employer.
• Forte v. Sullivan
  935 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1991-05-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court's dismissal of the plaintiff's complaint was premature and vacated the dismissal, remanding for further proceedings.
• Turner v. Barry
  856 F.2d 1539· D.C. Cir.· 1988-09-16 ·cited 2×
  District of Columbia probation officers are absolutely immune from liability for damages in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for alleged errors in the investigation and preparation of presentence reports.
• Sparks v. The Character & Fitness Comm. OF Ky.
  818 F.2d 541· 6th Cir.· 1987-05-11 ·cited 2×
  Officials performing quasi-judicial duties related to bar admissions, even if not judges, are entitled to absolute judicial immunity.
• Bishop v. State BAR OF Tex.
  791 F.2d 435· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the State Bar of Texas is not a 'person' under § 1983 and that its employees are protected by immunity, affirming the dismissal of Bishop's claims.
• Childs v. W.W. Reynoldson
  777 F.2d 1305· 8th Cir.· 1985-11-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that members of the Iowa Supreme Court and the Iowa Board of Law Examiners are entitled to absolute judicial and quasi-judicial immunity, respectively, for their actions related to bar admissions.
• McCAW v. Winter
  745 F.2d 533· 8th Cir.· 1984-10-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state court judge and clerk were absolutely immune from liability for actions taken in their judicial capacities, thus the § 1983 action was frivolous.
• Sheppard v. The E. W. Scripps Co.
  421 F.2d 555· 6th Cir.· 1970-01-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the coroner's actions were protected by quasi-judicial immunity, thus the Civil Rights Act claim must fail.
• Dodez v. Weygandt
  173 F.2d 965· 6th Cir.· 1949-05-02 ·cited 2×
  Members of selective service boards are quasi-judicial officers and are immune from damage suits for actions taken in their official capacity.
• Johansson v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Value Adjustment Bd.
  346 So. 3d 90· Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-05-04 ·cited 1×
  Wayne C. Johansson appealed the dismissal of his complaint against the Miami-Dade County Value Adjustment Board (VAB), claiming the VAB violated his procedural due process rights in reviewing his property value petitions. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal,
• Medberry v. C/O McCALLISTER
  937 So. 2d 808· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-09-18 ·cited 1×
  A Florida appellate court reversed the dismissal of a prison inmate's tort action against two correctional officers, holding that the inmate's claims against the officers in their individual capacities do not require compliance with the statutory notice requirement in section 768
• Hughes v. Tarrant Cnty. Tex.
  948 F.2d 918· 5th Cir.· 1991-11-29 ·cited 1×
  The court held that county commissioners are not entitled to absolute legislative immunity for their decision to deny attorney fees, and the district attorney and assistant are not entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity for providing legal advice.
• Bennett v. Ardelle Williams
  892 F.2d 822· 9th Cir.· 1989-12-27 ·cited 1×
  A bankruptcy trustee is entitled to quasi-judicial immunity for discretionary acts of hiring and supervising a property manager, provided they act within their authority, with informed court approval, and give notice to the debtor.
• Hutcheson v. Judge Melissa Black
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-08
  Federal court lacks jurisdiction to review state court rulings or grant relief against state judges and clerks for actions taken in their judicial capacities.
• Holton v. Sudzina
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-05
  The court held that judicial assistants are entitled to quasi-judicial immunity for scheduling duties and that a First Amendment retaliation claim based on a state law violation is not cognizable under § 1983.
• Holton v. Sudzina
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-16
  The court recommended denying the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the amended complaint, finding that claims were barred by quasi-judicial immunity or failed to state a claim under federal law.
• Francis v. Judge Thomas Barber
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-02
  The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to deny the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the complaint without leave to amend.
• Deppe v. Vetter
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-10-22
  The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting dismissal in part with prejudice for judicial immunity and without prejudice for shotgun pleading, while allowing plaintiff one final opportunity to amend.
• Scott v. Byrd
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-11
  The court held that judicial immunity bars claims against judges and that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over claims against the private defendant, thus denying the motion for a temporary restraining order and dismissing the complaint.
• Sheets v. Charlotte Cnty.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-10
  Special Magistrate Roepstorff is entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity, and certain claims against other defendants are dismissed for failure to state a claim or lack of constitutional basis.
• Cowart v. Duro
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-12-17
  The court held that the plaintiff's second amended complaint, which relied on criminal statutes and failed to comply with pleading rules and prior court orders, should be dismissed without prejudice.
• Gabriel v. Bogaert
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-10-02
  The court recommended granting the application to proceed in forma pauperis but dismissing the amended complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim.
• Diaz-Ryan v. Mosley
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-25
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint must be dismissed for failure to state a claim, lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, and because the claims against the defendants are barred by judicial and quasi-judicial immunity.