Lois Cleon Shelton Aubuchon v. State of Missouri

631 F.2d 581, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 13289
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedOctober 8, 1980
Docket80-1314
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 631 F.2d 581 (Lois Cleon Shelton Aubuchon v. State of Missouri) 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
Lois Cleon Shelton Aubuchon v. State of Missouri, 631 F.2d 581, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 13289 (8th Cir. 1980).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Lois Aubuchon appeals pro se the dismissal of her § 1983 action against the State of Missouri. Aubuchon sought relief and damages from a 1975 state court judgment which she alleges violated her constitutional rights. The state court proceeding involved the probate of her father’s estate. During that proceeding a third party successfully challenged the validity of the marriage of Aubuchon’s parents. The Circuit Court of Dent County held that Aubuchon failed to establish the existence of a valid common law marriage between her parents and could not inherit under her father’s will.

We affirm the judgment of the district court 487 F.Supp. 529 dismissing Aubu-chon’s complaint without prejudice to any remedies available to her under state law.

Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is directed at individuals acting under color of state law, not individual states. The State of Missouri is not a proper party to an action brought under § 1983. Milton v. Nelson, 527 F.2d 1158 (9th Cir. 1976); Neal v. Georgia, 469 F.2d 446,448 (5th Cir. 1972); Meyer v. New Jersey, 460 F.2d 1252, 1253 (3d Cir. 1972); Collins v. Florida, 432 F.2d 60, 61 n.5 (5th Cir. 1970); Stewart v. Minnick, 409 F.2d 826 (9th Cir. 1969). It appears that the only individual Aubuchon could have named as a party in this action was the state court judge, who is protected by the doctrine of judicial immunity. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 98 S.Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978).

Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of the action by the district court.

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

Related

McCaslin v. Bozarth
51 F.3d 277 (Eighth Circuit, 1995)
Conrod v. Missouri State Highway Patrol
810 S.W.2d 614 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1991)
Will v. Michigan Department of State Police
491 U.S. 58 (Supreme Court, 1989)
Muza v. Missouri Department of Social Services
769 S.W.2d 168 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1989)
Brotzler v. County of Scott
427 N.W.2d 685 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 1988)
Vest v. Schafer
757 P.2d 588 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1988)
Malady v. Baker
650 F. Supp. 901 (E.D. Missouri, 1987)
Miner v. Baker
638 F. Supp. 239 (E.D. Missouri, 1986)
St. Louis County, Mo. v. CITY OF TOWN
590 F. Supp. 731 (E.D. Missouri, 1984)
Shaw v. City of St. Louis
664 S.W.2d 572 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1983)
Prettyman v. STATE OF NEB., COUNTY OF CASS
537 F. Supp. 712 (D. Nebraska, 1982)
Seltzer v. Ashcroft
675 F.2d 184 (Eighth Circuit, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
631 F.2d 581, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 13289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lois-cleon-shelton-aubuchon-v-state-of-missouri-ca8-1980.