Darrel R. Neidigh v. David Tatum, Sheriff, Lawrence County, Mo

Eighth Circuit

Darrel R. Neidigh v. David Tatum, Sheriff, Lawrence County, Mo

50 F.3d 12, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11495, 1995 WL 111438

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedMarch 17, 1995

Docket94-2879

StatusUnpublished

This text of 50 F.3d 12 (Darrel R. Neidigh v. David Tatum, Sheriff, Lawrence County, Mo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Darrel R. Neidigh v. David Tatum, Sheriff, Lawrence County, Mo, 50 F.3d 12, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11495, 1995 WL 111438 (8th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

50 F.3d 12

NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.
Darrel R. NEIDIGH, Appellant,
v.
David TATUM, Sheriff, Lawrence County, MO, Appellee.

No. 94-2879.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Mar. 7, 1995.
Filed: Mar. 17, 1995.

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Darrel R. Neidigh appeals the District Court's1 grant of summary judgment to defendant Lawrence County Sheriff David Tatum in this 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action. Having reviewed the record and the parties' arguments, we agree with the District Court's conclusion that Tatum is entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity. "Absolute immunity for officials assigned to carry out a judge's orders is necessary to insure that such officials can perform their function without the need to secure permanent legal counsel." Valdez v. City & County of Denver, 878 F.2d 1285, 1288 (10th Cir. 1989); see also Patterson v. Von Riesen, 999 F.2d 1235, 1240 (8th Cir. 1993). We also reject Neidigh's argument that the signed contempt order directing his arrest and confinement was facially invalid: even assuming that the order was infirm as a matter of state law, "its procedural defects were in no way evident or detectable on the face of the document." Whiting v. Kirk, 960 F.2d 248, 252 (1st Cir. 1992); see also Turney v. O'Toole, 898 F.2d 1470, 1473 (10th Cir. 1990) (noting that court order which "does not fulfill every legal requirement" is not facially invalid because even erroneous orders can be valid); Valdez, 878 F.2d at 1289 (recognizing that "public interest demands strict adherence to judicial decrees" and that officials "must not be required to act as pseudo-appellate courts scrutinizing the orders of judges"). Thus, the judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

The Honorable Russell G. Clark, Senior United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

50 F.3d 12

NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.
Darrel R. NEIDIGH, Appellant,
v.
David TATUM, Sheriff, Lawrence County, MO, Appellee.

No. 94-2879.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Mar. 7, 1995.
Filed: Mar. 17, 1995.

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Darrel R. Neidigh appeals the District Court's1 grant of summary judgment to defendant Lawrence County Sheriff David Tatum in this 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action. Having reviewed the record and the parties' arguments, we agree with the District Court's conclusion that Tatum is entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity. "Absolute immunity for officials assigned to carry out a judge's orders is necessary to insure that such officials can perform their function without the need to secure permanent legal counsel." Valdez v. City & County of Denver, 878 F.2d 1285, 1288 (10th Cir. 1989); see also Patterson v. Von Riesen, 999 F.2d 1235, 1240 (8th Cir. 1993). We also reject Neidigh's argument that the signed contempt order directing his arrest and confinement was facially invalid: even assuming that the order was infirm as a matter of state law, "its procedural defects were in no way evident or detectable on the face of the document." Whiting v. Kirk, 960 F.2d 248, 252 (1st Cir. 1992); see also Turney v. O'Toole, 898 F.2d 1470, 1473 (10th Cir. 1990) (noting that court order which "does not fulfill every legal requirement" is not facially invalid because even erroneous orders can be valid); Valdez, 878 F.2d at 1289 (recognizing that "public interest demands strict adherence to judicial decrees" and that officials "must not be required to act as pseudo-appellate courts scrutinizing the orders of judges"). Thus, the judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

The Honorable Russell G. Clark, Senior United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 F.3d 12, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11495, 1995 WL 111438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darrel-r-neidigh-v-david-tatum-sheriff-lawrence-co-ca8-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack