Angela Moody v. Lowndes County, Mississippi, 868 F.3d 348

Angela Moody and Scott Farrell, divorced parents, exchanged numerous hostile messages (emails, texts, Facebook) after their divorce; some were about child-support/visitation and others were admitted by Moody to be meant to "hurt his feelings."
Farrell repeatedly told Moody to stop contacting him; he also contacted Lowndes County Deputy Officer Tony Cooper and provided documentation of the messages.
Prosecutor Allison Kizer reviewed the materials and, according to Cooper, indicated Moody’s conduct could meet Mississippi’s felony cyberstalking statute; Cooper later reviewed the messages, sought an arrest warrant, and signed an affidavit. A justice court judge issued the warrant; Moody was arrested and released on recognizance.
A preliminary hearing led a different justice court judge to dismiss the case. Moody then sued Farrell, Officer Cooper, and Lowndes County under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state-law theories; the district court granted summary judgment for all defendants.
On appeal Moody argued Farrell acted under color of state law via joint action/conspiracy with Officer Cooper, and that her arrest violated the First and Fourth Amendments; the Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding Moody failed to show Farrell was a state actor.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Farrell acted "under color of state law" for § 1983 purposes	Farrell jointly acted with Officer Cooper or conspired with police to procure an arrest, so his conduct is fairly attributable to the State	Farrell was a private citizen whose contacts with Cooper did not transform him into a state actor; police conducted independent investigation	Court held Moody failed to show Farrell acted under color of state law; summary judgment affirmed
Whether police arrested Moody without probable cause because of Farrell's pressure	Arrest was caused by Farrell’s pressure and therefore not supported by independent probable cause	Sheriff’s department independently investigated; prosecutor and a judge found probable cause	Court held record shows independent investigation and official determinations of probable cause, undermining joint-action theory
Whether Moody’s speech was protected such that arrest violated First Amendment	Arrest targeted protected speech; thus arrest violated First Amendment	The court need not reach merits because no state-action was shown; also harassment/cyberstalking can be unprotected	Court did not decide First Amendment claim because § 1983 fails for lack of state action
Whether Farrell is immune from suit	N/A on appeal (primary contention was lack of state-action)	Farrell asserted immunity as defense	Court did not reach immunity because plaintiff failed to establish state action

Filarsky v. Delia, 566 U.S. 377 (private-party state-action framework under § 1983)
Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144 (state action and joint conduct analysis)
Ballard v. Wall, 413 F.3d 510 (5th Cir. 2005) (private parties generally not state actors)
Priester v. Lowndes County, 354 F.3d 414 (5th Cir. 2004) (standard for fair attribution of private conduct to state)
Daniel v. Ferguson, 839 F.2d 1124 (5th Cir. 1988) (private party that merely elicits police action not a state actor)
Smith v. Brookshire Bros., Inc., 519 F.2d 93 (5th Cir. 1975) (prearranged plan with police can show joint action)
Bartholomew v. Lee, 889 F.2d 62 (5th Cir. 1989) (influence insufficient for state action absent control over police)
Sims v. Jefferson Downs Racing Ass’n, 778 F.2d 1068 (5th Cir. 1985) (need to show police acted pursuant to preconceived plan to arrest at private party’s behest)