Summary
finding court clerk immune for allegedly directing deputy clerks to refuse to file forms presented by a pro se litigant seeking dismissal of a civil action
Summary of this case from Smiley v. GibsonOpinion
No. 11-55518 D.C. No. 3:10-cv-00102-IEG-NLS
12-20-2011
MICHAEL R. COULTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MICHAEL M. RODDY, Defendant - Appellee.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Irma E. Gonzalez, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 19, 2011
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
--------
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Michael Coulter appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Michael Roddy, the Executive Officer for the Superior Court of California, San Diego. Coulter alleges that Roddy directed the Deputy Clerks of the San Diego County Superior Court to "improperly and illegally deny filing" of outdated Judicial Council forms. As a result the Deputy Clerks rejected and refused to file requests for dismissal of a civil action based upon Roddy's directive.
We agree with the district court that the alleged actions fall within the scope of the Clerk of the Court's duties that are an integral part of the judicial process. Accordingly, the district court did not err by dismissing the complaint. See Mullis v. U.S. Bankr. Court, 828 F.2d 1385, 1390 (9th Cir. 1987) (explaining that court clerks have absolute quasi-judicial immunity from damages for civil rights violations when they perform tasks that are an integral part of the judicial process).
AFFIRMED.