From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pitchford v. Marshall

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Jun 6, 2011
417 F. App'x 581 (8th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 11-1166.

Submitted: May 24, 2011.

Filed: June 6, 2011.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

Frederick L. Pitchford, Earle, AR, pro se.

Before BYE, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.


[UNPUBLISHED]


Frederick Pitchford appeals the district court's preservice dismissal of his civil rights action. We conclude that dismissal was proper. See Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12, 112 S.Ct. 286, 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991) (per curiam) (judicial immunity); Kurtz v. City of Shrewsbury, 245 F.3d 753, 758 (8th Cir. 2001) (requirements for conspiracy claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1985); Jensen v. Henderson, 315 F.3d 854, 863 (8th Cir. 2002) ( 42 U.S.C. § 1986 claim depends on existence of valid § 1985 claim). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.


Summaries of

Pitchford v. Marshall

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Jun 6, 2011
417 F. App'x 581 (8th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

Pitchford v. Marshall

Case Details

Full title:Frederick L. PITCHFORD, Appellant, v. Denzil Price MARSHALL, Jr., District…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Jun 6, 2011

Citations

417 F. App'x 581 (8th Cir. 2011)

Citing Cases

Francis v. Baker

This absolute immunity also includes § 1985 and § 1986 liability. See, Pitchford v. Marshall, 417 Fed.Appx. …