Ottis Mayo Jones v. Wilson Warlick, Gordon S. Carr, and Arthur Goodman, Jr.

Fourth Circuit

Ottis Mayo Jones v. Wilson Warlick, Gordon S. Carr, and Arthur Goodman, Jr.

364 F.2d 828

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedAugust 1, 1966

Docket10340_1

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 364 F.2d 828 (Ottis Mayo Jones v. Wilson Warlick, Gordon S. Carr, and Arthur Goodman, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ottis Mayo Jones v. Wilson Warlick, Gordon S. Carr, and Arthur Goodman, Jr., 364 F.2d 828 (4th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jones appeals the disposition by summary judgment of his civil suit for damages against United States District Judge Wilson Warlick, FBI Agent Gordon S. Carr and Arthur Goodman, Jr., defense attorney at Jones’ trial for violation of the Dyer Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2312. The complaint alleges that the defendants conspired at Jones’ trial to deprive him of his right to a fair trial.

Judge Bell of this Court, sitting by designation in the District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, ruled that the federal officials and attorney Goodman were immune from civil suit for the acts alleged. See Barr v. Matteo, 360 U.S. 564, 79 S.Ct. 1335, 3 L.Ed.2d 1434; Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335, 80 U.S. 335, 20 L.Ed. 646; Yaselli v. Goff, 2 Cir., 12 F.2d 396, 56 A.L.R. 1239, aff’d per curiam, 275 U.S. 503, 48 S.Ct. 155, 72 L.Ed. 395.

Without accepting any of Jones’ characterizations of the alleged acts, we affirm the decision below for the reasons more fully stated in Judge Bell’s thorough opinion.

Affirmed.

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