Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mosley v. Gracia

United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division

February 7, 2017

JODY K. MOSLEY, Plaintiff,
v.
J.R. GRACIA, Probate Court Judge, Defendant.

          OPINION

          GORDON J. QUIST UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Plaintiff, Jody K. Mosley, proceeding pro se, has filed a one-page complaint against J.R. Gracia, Probate Court Judge, which alleges:

1. Whom it may concern. Under R. Gracia [sic], I have been falsely arrested. Warrants that shouldn't be. Aretha Brown Borgess.
2. My doctor was run off. Melvin Cherry. So they wouldn't give my disability.
3. DHS/Chris Blood/Cathy Duegan has been violating my right/depriving me (help) as well as benifet [sic].
4. I've been almost set up, of which there [sic] still trying.
5. I have had all rights taken as father. Violated every time in his court, abusing his powers..
6. Falsely incarserated [sic], as well harrassment [sic].

         I'm asking for my rights, as a father. Plus I lived here all my life, where are my rights? I want my baby's [sic] back.

         (ECF No. 1.)

         On January 5, 2017, the magistrate judge issued an order granting Mosley leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 4.) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court is required to dismiss any action brought under federal law if the complaint is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Benson v. O'Brian, 179 F.3d 1014, 1016 (6th Cir.

         1999) (holding that "§ 1915(e)(2) applies only to in forma pauperis proceedings"). The Court must read Podewell's pro se complaint indulgently, see Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520, 92 S.Ct. 594, 596 (1972), and accept his allegations as true, unless they are clearly irrational or wholly incredible. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33, 112 S.Ct. 1728, 1733 (1992).

         Mosley sues a defendant immune from monetary relief, and he fails to state a claim. Thus, his complaint must be dismissed as required by § 1915(e)(2).

         It is well established that a judge is absolutely immune from suit seeking monetary relief, so long as the judge was performing judicial functions. See Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 9-10, 112 S.Ct. 286, 288 (1991) (per curiam). “[J]udicial immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from ultimate assessment of damages.” Id. at 11, 112 S.Ct. at 288. Judicial “immunity applies to actions brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to recover for alleged deprivation of civil rights.” Stern v. Mascio, 262 F.3d 600, 606 (6th Cir. 2001). A judge is not immune (1) where the judge's alleged actions were not taken in the judge's judicial capacity or (2) where the actions, although judicial in nature, were taken in the complete absence of jurisdiction. Mireles, 502 U.S. at 11-12, 112 S.Ct. at 288. “[T]he scope of the judge's jurisdiction must be construed broadly where the issue is the immunity of the judge. A judge will not be deprived of immunity because the action he took was in error, was done maliciously, or was in excess of his ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.