Gerald Lepre, Jr. v. Paul s. Lukus, 602 F. App'x 864

Pro se plaintiff Gerald Lepre sued multiple private individuals, Susquehanna County entities, Judge Kenneth Seamans, and attorneys under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging a conspiracy to deprive him of parental rights and to extort child support.
Lepre alleged an informal 2010 custody transfer from the child’s mother (Shifler-Ferraro) to the Lukus family and subsequent child-support proceedings that he claims were biased due to relationships among local officials and counsel.
The Western District dismissed claims against Judge Seamans, the Lukuses’ attorneys, and the county Domestic Relations Section on immunity grounds and transferred remaining claims to the Middle District.
In the Middle District Lepre amended; motions to dismiss were granted as to Paul Lukus, the Forest City Police Department, and various Susquehanna County defendants for failure to state § 1983 claims, lack of state-action, and Rooker–Feldman jurisdictional bar to relief collaterally attacking state-court orders.
Lepre failed to show a Monell policy/custom linking the FCPD to his injuries, failed to plausibly plead state action for the alleged private custody transfer, and did not mount a viable facial challenge to 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4341(b).
The Middle District ordered Lepre to show cause why two individual defendants (Shifler-Ferraro and Christine Lukus) should not be dismissed; Lepre declined to contest dismissal, and the court dismissed them and closed the case.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether judge and state actors are immune from suit	Lepre alleged judicial and state-actor misconduct in custody/support orders	Judge, attorneys, and DRS are protected by absolute or Eleventh Amendment immunity	Dismissal affirmed: judicial absolute immunity and Eleventh Amendment immunity apply
Whether municipal (FCPD) liability under § 1983 was stated	Lepre alleged FCPD/Lukus caused/support action and custody deprivation	No Monell policy, practice, or custom alleged to hold municipality liable	Dismissal affirmed for failure to plead a Monell policy/custom
Whether private custody transfer and alleged threats constitute state action	Lepre alleged state involvement because Paul Lukus was police chief and threatened arrest	Mere employment or vague threats do not transform private conduct into state action	Dismissal affirmed: no plausible allegation of state action under § 1983
Whether federal court has jurisdiction to review state custody/support orders	Lepre characterized his claims as constitutional rather than direct appeal	Defendants invoked Rooker–Feldman to bar federal review of state-court decisions	Dismissal affirmed: Rooker–Feldman bars federal collateral attack on state-court judgments

Azubuko v. Royal, 443 F.3d 302 (3d Cir.) (judicial absolute immunity)
Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (municipal liability requires an unlawful policy or custom)
Gallas v. Supreme Court of Pa., 211 F.3d 760 (3d Cir.) (judge acts within jurisdiction if order is colorably within court’s authority)
Kost v. Kozakiewicz, 1 F.3d 176 (3d Cir.) (elements of a § 1983 claim)
Robb v. City of Philadelphia, 733 F.2d 286 (3d Cir.) (framework for due-process interest and procedures)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standards: labels and conclusions insufficient)
Groman v. Township of Manalapan, 47 F.3d 628 (3d Cir.) (private action not converted into state action by tenuous ties)
Morse v. Lower Merion Sch. Dist., 132 F.3d 902 (3d Cir.) (bald allegations insufficient to defeat dismissal)
Great Western Mining & Mineral Co. v. Fox Rothschild LLP, 615 F.3d 159 (3d Cir.) (Rooker–Feldman test for barred claims)
Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (Eleventh Amendment bars suit against state entities)
Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651 (Eleventh Amendment and limits on retroactive relief against states)
Heffernan v. Hunter, 189 F.3d 405 (3d Cir.) (private counsel immune from civil‑rights conspiracy claims when acting in attorney role)