http://caught.net/prose/immunity.htm

 In Caught.net & The Pro Se Way, former Phoenix, AZ Attorney Robert A. Hirschfeld, states:

1. Cooper v. O’Conner, 99 F.2d 133.

“There is a general rule that a ministerial officer who acts wrongfully, although in good faith, is nevertheless liable in a civil action and cannot claim the immunity of the sovereign.”

 

2. Rankin v. Howard, (1980) 633 F.2d 844, cert den. Zeller v. Rankin, 101 S.Ct. 2020, 451 U.S. 939, 68 L.Ed 2d 326.

“When a judge knows that he lacks jurisdiction, or acts in the face of clearly valid statutes expressly depriving him of jurisdiction, judicial immunity is lost.”

In  Rankin v. Howard, 633 F.2d 844 (1980) “the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an Arizona District Court dismissal based upon absolute judicial immunity, finding that both necessary immunity prongs were absent…”

 

3. …later, in Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072 (1986),

“the Ninth Circuit, en banc , criticized the “judicial nature” analysis it had published in Rankin as unnecessarily restrictive. But Rankin’s ultimate result was not changed, because Judge Howard had been independently divested of absolute judicial immunity by his complete lack of jurisdiction.”

 

4. Stump v. Sparkman, id., 435 U.S. 349.

“Some Defendants urge that any act “of a judicial nature” entitles the Judge to absolute judicial immunity. But in a jurisdictional vacuum, (that is, absence of all jurisdiction) the second prong necessary to absolute judicial immunity is missing.”

 

5. Piper v. Pearson, 2 Gray 120, cited in Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335, 20 L.Ed. 646 (1872)

“Where there is no jurisdiction, there can be no discretion, for discretion is incident to jurisdiction.”

 

6.   Davis v. Burris, 51 Ariz. 220, 75 P.2d 689 (1938)

“A judge must be acting within his jurisdiction as to subject matter and person, to be entitled to immunity from civil action for his acts.”

 

7. Gregory v. Thompson, 500 F2d 59 (C.A. Ariz. 1974)

“Generally, judges are immune from suit for judicial acts within or in excess of their jurisdiction even if those acts have been done maliciously or corruptly; the only exception being for acts done in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.”

 

8.  Little v. U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 217 Miss. 576, 64 So. 2d 697(2011)

“When a judicial officer acts entirely without jurisdiction or without compliance with jurisdiction requisites he may be held civilly liable for abuse of process even though his act involved a decision made in good faith, that he had jurisdiction.”

 

9. Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137 (1803)

“… the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle that a law repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.”

 

10. Ableman v. Booth, 21 Howard 506 (1859).

“No judicial process, whatever form it may assume, can have any lawful authority outside of the limits of the jurisdiction of the court or judge by whom it is issued; and an attempt to enforce it beyond these boundaries is nothing less than lawless violence.”

 

11. Hoffsomer v. Hayes, 92 Okla 32, 227 F 417.

“The courts are not bound by an officer’s interpretation of the law under which he presumes to act.”