Brian Lyszkowski v. Diane Gibbons
686 F. App'x 87
3rd Cir.2017Background
- Lyszkowksi sued Bucks County, a judge, a probation officer, and a prothonotary under §1983 for due-process claims related to a 2013 probation-violation hearing and a docketing/appeal issue.
- The probation violation hearing on May 1, 2013 led to probation revocation and a six-to-12-month confinement sentence.
- Lyszkowksi challenged alleged ex parte communications and the judge’s denial of a motion to strike.
- Bramblett allegedly docketed Lyszkowksi’s appeal incorrectly, hindering resort to the Pennsylvania Superior Court
- District court dismissed the initial and amended complaints, invoking judicial and quasi-judicial immunities; Lyszkowksi appealed
- On appeal, the court affirmed dismissal but with a modification regarding Silvestri’s immunity handling
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Judge Gibbons is absolutely immune from §1983 liability | Lyszkowksi argues Gibbons acted in error and sought to strike without jurisdiction | Gibbons acted in her judicial capacity, entitled to absolute immunity unless no jurisdiction | Yes; Gibbons immune in judicial capacity |
| Whether Bramblett’s docketing error constitutes cognizable §1983 injury | Bramblett’s docketing error obstructed his appeal to the Superior Court | No cognizable injury since Superior Court addressed the appeal on its merits | Issue resolved against Lyszkowksi; no §1983 injury shown |
| Whether Silvestri’s conduct could support §1983 claims given immunity framework | Silvestri inflamed the judge or improperly affected proceedings | Actions may be executive, not quasi-judicial; immunity should apply | Remanded/clarified; district court’s dismissal without prejudice for Silvestri (not barred by immunity) due to potential qualified immunity issues |
| Whether Heck v. Humphrey bars Lyszkowksi’s claims about the sentence | A challenge to the maximum term under §1983 | Heck bars suit seeking to invalidate confinement duration absent favorable termination | Affirmed; Heck applies, dismissal appropriate; dismissal without prejudice to potential future action after favorable termination |
| Whether the dismissal against Silvestri should be without prejudice | Dismissal should bar further pursuit | Immune status may require reconsideration; not final on merits | Modified to without prejudice for Silvestri claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Gallas v. Sup. Ct. of Pa., 211 F.3d 760 (3d Cir. 2000) (absolute immunity only for actions within judicial capacity; not in clear absence of jurisdiction)
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (U.S. 1994) (bar to §1983 claim challenging conviction or sentence until favorable termination)
- Harper v. Jeffries, 808 F.2d 281 (3d Cir. 1986) (executive capacity, not absolute immunity, for probation officers)
- Curry v. Yachera, 835 F.3d 373 (3d Cir. 2016) (Heck-related dismissal can be without prejudice; caution on immunity analysis)
- Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74 (2005) (favorable termination principle in Heck context)