Willis L. Grove v. Victor A. Rizzolo

Third Circuit

Willis L. Grove v. Victor A. Rizzolo

441 F.2d 1153, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10283

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMay 10, 1971

Docket19556

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 441 F.2d 1153 (Willis L. Grove v. Victor A. Rizzolo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Willis L. Grove v. Victor A. Rizzolo, 441 F.2d 1153, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10283 (3d Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff appeals the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint on the ground that defendant, a former county judge, was protected by the doctrine of judicial immunity.

Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that, while held in custody awaiting trial in the state court, he sent defendant a document entitled “Petition for Redress of Grievances” which complained of unjust and unfair treatment by the Warden; that defendant refused to hear plaintiff or order his petition filed; and that instead defendant gave the petition to the Chief Probation Officer of the County in which he was being held. Plaintiff contends that while the defendant was admittedly a judge at the time of the alleged violation, the district court erred in holding that his acts were covered by the judicial immunity defense.

The allegations of the complaint do not negative the fair inference that the defendant acted on the belief that plaintiff was not seeking to commence a legal action but, rather, desired an investigation of the conditions under which he was being held. In these circumstances, we do not view the judge’s action in referring the petition to a probation officer . as being beyond the ambit of the judicial immunity doctrine.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff appeals the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint on the ground that defendant, a former county judge, was protected by the doctrine of judicial immunity.

Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that, while held in custody awaiting trial in the state court, he sent defendant a document entitled “Petition for Redress of Grievances” which complained of unjust and unfair treatment by the Warden; that defendant refused to hear plaintiff or order his petition filed; and that instead defendant gave the petition to the Chief Probation Officer of the County in which he was being held. Plaintiff contends that while the defendant was admittedly a judge at the time of the alleged violation, the district court erred in holding that his acts were covered by the judicial immunity defense.

The allegations of the complaint do not negative the fair inference that the defendant acted on the belief that plaintiff was not seeking to commence a legal action but, rather, desired an investigation of the conditions under which he was being held. In these circumstances, we do not view the judge’s action in referring the petition to a probation officer . as being beyond the ambit of the judicial immunity doctrine.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

441 F.2d 1153, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willis-l-grove-v-victor-a-rizzolo-ca3-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack