Mellema v. Silver

Full title: Michelle Mellema, Plaintiff, v. Roslyn O. Silver, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, D. Arizona

Date published: May 4, 2009

No. CV 09-844-PHX-MHM (D. Ariz. May. 4, 2009)

Opinion

No. CV 09-844-PHX-MHM.

May 4, 2009

ORDER

MARY MURGUIA, District Judge

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. (Doc. # 3) The Court will also address whether Plaintiff's Complaint complies with 28 § U.S.C. 1915(e), which specifies when a district court must dismiss an in forma pauperis proceeding.

I. Standard of Review

II. Discussion

28 U.S.C. § 1915See Lopez v. Smith203 F.3d 1122 1127^th See id. See Mellema v. Arizona State Bar 28 U.S.C. § 1915

Federal judges are absolutely immune from civil liability for damages for acts performed in their judicial capacity. Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 9-10 (1991). Judicial immunity applies "however injurious in its consequences [the act] may have proved to the plaintiff." Moore v. Brewster, 96 F.3d 1240, 1244 (9^th Cir. 1996). Judicial acts are those in which a judge is "perform[ing] the function of resolving disputes between parties, or of authoritatively adjudicating private rights." Antoine v. Byers Anderson, Inc., 508 U.S. 429, 435-36 (1993); see also Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 362 (1978) (an act is "judicial" when it is a function normally performed by a judge and the parties dealt with the judge in his judicial capacity). Here, Judge Silver rendered a decision in Plaintiff's former case in her judicial capacity. Judge Silver therefore is entitled to absolute judicial immunity. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Complaint in the instant case must be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

III. Conclusion

Based on the foregoing,

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. (Doc. #3)

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice. (Doc. # 1)

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment accordingly.