MOBLEY v. FOSTER
1:17-cv-00117
| M.D.N.C. | Apr 20, 2017Background
- Plaintiff Jason Darnell Mobley (pro se) sued Judge Angela C. Foster, several state actors (DEPUTY county attorney, DSS worker, attorney advocate, GALs, probation officer), and the Guilford County General Court of Justice under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking return of his child, restoration of reputation, and $10 million damages for termination of parental rights stemming from state juvenile proceedings in 2013–2014.
- Complaint alleges Plaintiff missed a Nov. 1, 2013 juvenile hearing because of an October 31, 2013 arrest; charges were later dismissed (Feb. 4, 2014), but juvenile proceedings resulted in termination of parental rights and adoption.
- Plaintiff filed the federal complaint on Feb. 10, 2017. He attached state-court Orders (pretrial/hearing order and an Order Terminating Parental Rights) showing hearings and testimony, including that a DSS witness testified at the May 16, 2014 adjudicatory hearing.
- Court screened the pro se in forma pauperis complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) for frivolousness and failure to state a claim.
- The magistrate judge concluded: the Guilford County General Court of Justice is not a “person” under § 1983; official-capacity damages claims are barred by the Eleventh Amendment/Will; Judge Foster has absolute judicial immunity for acts in her judicial capacity; the Complaint lacks factual allegations tying Trial Defendants to constitutional violations; federal claims should be dismissed and state-law claims declined under § 1367(c)(3).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness (statute of limitations) | Claims arise from Nov. 1, 2013 juvenile session; suit filed Feb. 10, 2017 | § 1983 claims governed by NC three-year limitations period | Claims tied to Nov. 1, 2013 are time-barred by three-year statute of limitations |
| Capacity of Guilford County General Court of Justice under § 1983 | Court sued as defendant | Entity is a state court within NC judicial system, not a "person" under § 1983 | Guilford County General Court of Justice is not a person under § 1983; claims dismissed as frivolous |
| Official-capacity claims against state actors | Seeks damages from state officials for actions in juvenile proceedings | Official-capacity damages suit is effectively against the State and barred by Eleventh Amendment; State not a § 1983 person | Official-capacity § 1983 damages claims dismissed with prejudice (Eleventh Amendment/Will) |
| Individual-capacity claims against Judge Foster (judicial immunity) | Judge’s judicial acts denied due process and relied on false allegations; seeks return of child and damages | Judge’s decisions in parental-termination proceedings are judicial acts within jurisdiction; absolute judicial immunity applies | Absolute judicial immunity bars monetary and most injunctive relief against Judge Foster; claims dismissed with prejudice |
| Sufficiency of allegations against Trial Defendants (DSS, GALs, probation officer, deputy county attorney, attorney advocate) | Juvenile session used false allegations/defamation to terminate parental rights; seeks damages | Complaint lacks specific factual allegations linking each Trial Defendant to a constitutional deprivation; defamation alone is not a § 1983 claim; witness testimony is protected by testimonial immunity | Complaint fails to state plausible § 1983 claims against Trial Defendants; individual-capacity federal claims dismissed without prejudice for lack of factual pleading |
| State-law claims (defamation, etc.) after federal claims dismissed | Seeks restoration of reputation and return of child under state law theories | Court may decline supplemental jurisdiction once federal claims dismissed | Court recommends declining supplemental jurisdiction and dismissing state-law claims without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3) |
Key Cases Cited
- Nasim v. Warden, Md. House of Corr., 64 F.3d 951 (4th Cir. 1995) (purpose of IFP statute and screening);
- Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1989) (frivolousness standard for IFP screening);
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility pleading standard);
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard and dismissal for failure to state a claim);
- Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1989) (state and state officers in official capacity are not "persons" under § 1983 for damages);
- Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) (judicial immunity unless clear absence of jurisdiction);
- Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9 (1991) (judicial immunity is immunity from suit);
- Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (absolute immunity for witnesses' testimony);
- Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261 (1985) (statute of limitations for § 1983 governed by state personal-injury period).