Davis v. Fugitive Officer
This text of 401 F. Supp. 412 (Davis v. Fugitive Officer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the Court’s sua sponte raising of the question of jurisdiction of plaintiff’s complaint.
The plaintiff is attempting to initiate an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 against an unnamed and unknown fugitive officer of Madison County, Illinois, and the Honorable Judge Lu-ten, of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Missouri.
[413]*413An examination of plaintiff’s complaint clearly indicates that defendant Luten was acting within the scope of his judicial immunity. Morrison v. Walker, 404 F.2d 1046 (9th Cir., 1968).
Since the plaintiff has failed to specifically state which “fugitive officer” he is attempting to sue, it is obvious that his complaint cannot stand.
Even under the liberal reading given pro se complaints, it is obvious that plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action. In consequence,
It is hereby ordered that plaintiff’s complaint be and is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a cause of action.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
401 F. Supp. 412, 1975 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-fugitive-officer-moed-1975.