Background
Marvin E. Carrera appealed pro se from a district court judgment dismissing his action under Section nineteen hundred eighty-three of Title forty-two of the United States Code. The underlying dispute arose out of state court proceedings. Carrera sued the County of Los Angeles, Judge David J. Cowan, and Commissioner Latrice A. G. Byrdsong.
The court’s reasoning
The panel reviewed the dismissal de novo. The court affirmed the dismissal of claims against Judge Cowan and Commissioner Byrdsong, citing judicial immunity and the Eleventh Amendment. The court noted that judges are absolutely immune from suits for damages based on their judicial conduct except when acting in the clear absence of all jurisdiction. The court also affirmed the dismissal of claims against the County of Los Angeles because Carrera failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. The court applied the standard from Ashcroft versus Iqbal, requiring a complaint to contain sufficient factual matter accepted as true to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the broad scope of judicial immunity for state court officials and confirms that pro se litigants must meet the plausibility pleading standard to maintain Section nineteen hundred eighty-three claims against counties.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download