NCJ Number
44386
Date Published
1977
Length
15 pages
Annotation
THIS REPORT EXAMINES THE DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL IMMUNITY AS IT APPLIES TO ALL LEVELS OF STATE COURT JUDGES AND CERTAIN COURT-RELATED PERSONNEL AND DESCRIBES PROCEDURES FOR PROVIDING COUNSEL FOR STATE JUDGES WHO ARE SUED.
Abstract
THE ISSUES OF JUDICIAL IMMUNITY FROM CIVIL LIABILITY FOR ACTS PERFORMED BY A JUDGE IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AND THE RIGHT OF A JUDGE TO HAVE LEGAL REPRESENTATION IN THE EVENT HE IS SUED ARE CHANGING RAPIDLY. JUDICIAL IMMUNITY HAS BEEN EXPANDED TO INCLUDE JUDGES, TRADITIONAL QUASI-JUDICIAL INDIVIDUALS, AND SOME COURT-RELATED PERSONNEL, SUCH AS COURT CLERKS AND COURT REPORTERS. A NUMBER OF REASONS GIVEN FOR THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH A PROVISION FOR JUDGES HAVE INCLUDED THE JUDICIARY'S DUTY TO THE PUBLIC ONLY, AND NOT TO INDIVIDUALS; THE AVAILABILITY OF OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR REVIEW OF ADVERSE DECISIONS; AND PREVENTION OF UNDUE INFLUENCE ON JUDICIAL DECISIONS THROUGH FEAR OF SUBSEQUENT SUITS. THE COLLECTIVE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTS HAVE PROVIDED A FOUNDATION FOR LEGAL ACTIONS AGAINST STATE OFFICIALS BASED ON VIOLATION OF INDIVIDUAL CIVIL RIGHTS. AS A RESULT, LIMITED EXCEPTIONS TO THE APPLICATION OF IMMUNITY HAVE DEVELOPED IN TWO BROAD AREAS BASED ON THE TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT AND THE NATURE OF THE ACT OR MISDEED. SUPREME COURT RULINGS HAVE HELD THAT IMMUNITY IS RESTRICTED TO DAMAGE SUITS AND DOES NOT EXTEND TO SUITS FOR PROTECTIVE, EQUITABLE, OR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF. IN ADDITION, VARIOUS TYPES OF ACTS ARE NO LONGER RECOGNIZED AS JUDICIAL CONDUCT WITHIN THE PROTECTION OF IMMUNITY: (1) ACTS SHOWING LACK OF GOOD FAITH; (2) ACTS CRIMINAL IN NATURE; (3) ACTS IN ABSENCE OF AUTHORITY OR IN EXCESS OF JURISDICTION; AND (4) ACTS OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE OR MINISTERIAL NATURE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF EACH OF THESE EXCEPTIONS IS SUMMARIZED. THE DOCTRINE OF IMMUNITY IS ALSO APPLIED TO MOST COURT-RELATED POSITIONS, AS THESE JOBS ARE DIRECTLY LINKED TO A JUDGE'S FUNCTION AND TO HIS ORDERS. THE GENERAL RULE WHICH HAS BEEN APPLIED TO THESE PERSONS IS THAT IF THEY ACT PURSUANT TO A JUDICIAL MANDATE THAT IS WITHIN THE COURT' JURISDICTION, AND THAT HAS NO OBVIOUS DEFECTS, THEN THEY ARE PROTECTED FROM CIVIL LIABILITY BY THE IMMUNITY DOCTRINE IF THEIR DUTIES ARE EXECUTED IN A PROPER MANNER. A FINAL SECTION OUTLINES PROVISIONS FOR LEGAL REPRESENTATION FOR JUDGES SUED IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITIES IN 53 STATES AND TERRITORIES. DATA COVER THREE AREAS: (1) HOW LEGAL REPRESENTATION IS PROVIDED BY EACH STATE FOR JUDGES WHO ARE SUED; (2) WHO PAYS FOR OFFICIAL OR SUBSTITUTE LEGAL COUNSEL; AND (3) RECENT CASES AND RELEVANT COMMENTS ABOUT EACH STATE. THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SERVES AS OFFICIAL COUNSEL IN ALL BUT SIX STATES AND ONE TERRITORY. WITH TWO EXCEPTIONS, LOCAL OR STATE FUNDS COVER THE COSTS OF OFFICIAL COUNSEL. SIX STATES HAVE PROVISIONS REQUIRING INDIVIDUAL JUDGES TO PAY FOR ANY SUBSTITUTE COUNSEL IF THE OFFICIAL COUNSEL DECLINES. (VDA)