Summary
holding that court reporter's and court clerk's refusal to furnish plaintiff with a portion of state criminal trial transcript were acts performed in their capacities as quasi-judicial officers, which clothed them with judicial immunity
Summary of this case from Tyler v. JeanineOpinion
No. 22942.
March 6, 1969.
Leroy Stewart, in pro. per.
Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., Wm. E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jack E. Weber, Deputy Atty. Gen., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellees.
Before BARNES, CARTER, and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges.
We affirm the District Court's order dismissing appellant's civil rights complaint ( 42 U.S.C. § 1983).
Appellant sued the State of California, a court reporter, and a court clerk, complaining that the appellees refused to furnish him with that portion of his state criminal trial transcript containing the prosecutor's closing argument to the jury.
The State is not amenable to suit under the civil rights statute (Williford v. People of California (9th Cir. 1965) 352 F.2d 474); the acts charged to the individual appellees were acts performed in their capacity as quasi-judicial officers and they are clothed with judicial immunity ( Cf. Peckham v. Scanlon (7th Cir. 1957) 241 F.2d 761); and the action was barred by res judicata in that appellant's prior civil rights complaint including the same grievance was dismissed and this court denied leave to appeal in forma pauperis on the ground that the appeal was frivolous. (Sarelas v. Sheehan (7th Cir. 1965) 353 F.2d 5).
The order is affirmed.