Salis v. DoPico
24-1066-cv
2d Cir.Mar 21, 2025Background
- Owolabi Salis (plaintiff), a recently disbarred attorney, filed an amended complaint against various state and federal officials, agencies, and private parties, claiming constitutional violations relating to his disciplinary proceeding and disbarment.
- Defendants included the Chief Attorney and counsel of the First Judicial Department Grievance Committee, the New York and United States Attorneys General, the Kings County District Attorney, Thomson Reuters, and the New York State Bar Association.
- The district court dismissed Salis’s claims, citing sovereign immunity, quasi-judicial and prosecutorial immunity, failure to state a claim, and lack of service.
- Salis appealed the dismissal to the Second Circuit, proceeding pro se.
- The Second Circuit AFFIRMED the district court’s dismissal in all respects.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sovereign Immunity (official capacity claims) | USAG, NYAG, and Committee officials liable for § 1983 | US and NY state officials immune from suit in official capacity | Dismissal affirmed, sovereign immunity bars suit |
| Absolute/Prosecutorial Immunity (individuals) | Committee officials liable as individuals | Actions protected by quasi-judicial/prosecutorial immunity | Dismissal affirmed, immunity applies |
| Personal Involvement of KCDA and Reuters | KCDA and Reuters liable under § 1983 | Salis failed to allege any specific personal involvement | Dismissal affirmed for failure to state a claim |
| Service of NYSBA | Claims against NYSBA should proceed | NYSBA not properly served | Dismissal affirmed, lack of service |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206 (sovereign immunity bars suits against US without consent)
- Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332 (§ 1983 does not abrogate state sovereign immunity)
- Alfaro Motors, Inc. v. Ward, 814 F.2d 883 (specific factual allegations required for § 1983 claim)
- Tracy v. Freshwater, 623 F.3d 90 (no special solicitude for pro se lawyer-litigants)
- Anonymous v. Ass’n of the Bar of City of N.Y., 515 F.2d 427 (attorney grievance committees are quasi-judicial bodies)
- Fulton v. Goord, 591 F.3d 37 (monetary relief generally barred in official-capacity suits by Eleventh Amendment)