2010 Ohio 5229
D. Ariz.2010Background
- Plaintiff Carmen Garibay seeks to serve Sullivan during his appearance at a detention/identity hearing in 2:10-mj-03447-LOA in Phoenix, Arizona.
- Sullivan was arrested in Arizona on Illinois charges and is detained by U.S. Marshals.
- Plaintiff alleges media attention and police inquiries indicate Sullivan has evaded authorities and may be transferred or released with conditions.
- A Pretrial Services Report provides some support for evasion accusations.
- The court will permit service immediately after today’s hearing so as not to interfere with the detention and identification proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sullivan has process immunity while in court. | Immunity applies only to voluntary appearances. | Immunity should shield him from civil-process service during court attendance. | Not entitled to immunity; immunity does not apply to involuntary or compelled appearances. |
| Whether exceptional circumstances justify service during the proceeding. | Service during the proceeding is necessary due to transfer risk and ongoing charges. | Service should wait until after proceedings or not at all. | Yes; exceptional circumstances permit service after the hearing without delaying proceedings. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lamb v. Schmitt, 285 U.S. 222 (Supreme Court, 1932) (process-immunity protects court convenience; limited to voluntary attendance)
- Stewart v. Ramsay, 242 U.S. 128 (Supreme Court, 1916) (immunity discussed in context of court attendance)
- Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. of Wis. v. Hitchcock, 158 F. Supp. 783 (D. Mo. 1958) (immunity policy; attendance context; not applicable to criminal-defendant appearance)