Opinion
CASE NO. EDCV 15-776-GHK(PJW)
08-11-2015
NATHAN GUERRIERO, Plaintiff, v. BRIAN HADLEY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint, the other records on file herein, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the time for filing objections has expired and no objections have been made. The Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge and adopts them as its own findings and conclusions with the following modification at page five, lines 4-19:
This is true even were the Court to assume that the actions he took were in error, were done maliciously, or were in excess of his authority, see id.; and even assuming that Judge Hernandez had not taken an oath of office and was otherwise unqualified to be a judge. See Conklin v. Anthou, 495 Fed. Appx. 257, 264 (3d. Cir. 2012) ("Even assuming that the defendants [judges and
others] had not, in fact, taken their oaths of office. . . [plaintiff] points to no case law that would support the conclusion that this omission abrogated claims to immunity."); Caler v. Keegan, No. 13-2092, 2014 WL 1389950, at *3 (D. Co. Apr. 9, 2014) (even if oath of office was deficient, that fact did not abrogate or impact deputy sheriff's entitlement to qualified immunity); Jurich v. Campbell, No. 13-12544, 2014 WL 109489, at *2 (E.D. Mich. Jan 13, 2014) (rejecting plaintiff's argument that judge was acting outside his jurisdiction because he did not properly file an oath of office and finding that judicial immunity barred plaintiff's claims).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Complaint is dismissed with prejudice.
DATED: 8/11/15
/s/_________
GEORGE H. KING
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE