415 F. App'x 57
10th Cir.2011Background
- Since 2003, Smith has filed numerous federal suits and appeals, traced to Colorado bar denial after he refused a mental status exam.
- This appeal challenges district court dismissal of Bivens claims against current and former federal judges, DOJ officials, U.S. Marshals, and others.
- The district court dismissed the claims on absolute judicial immunity for judges and lack of a link between DOJ officials and constitutional rights violations.
- The complaint also failed to plead that defendants violated the Constitution through their own individual actions.
- The district court ruled marshals’ conduct (threat lists, escort to clerk) did not chill First Amendment rights, and dismissed with prejudice without leave to amend.
- The panel affirms the dismissal with prejudice and notes Smith’s ongoing filing restrictions and sanctions in Krieger.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether judicial immunity bars Smith's Bivens claims against judges | Smith argues decisions were wrong, constituting rights violations. | Judges are absolutely immune for their judicial acts. | Yes; dismissals upheld due to judicial immunity. |
| Whether Smith's Bivens claims show individual defendant actions | Smith alleges defendants violated rights through their own actions. | Complaint fails to plead each defendant's personal actions. | Yes; failure to allege individual actions supports dismissal. |
| Whether Bivens claims against officials in official capacity are proper | Smith seeks relief against officials for constitutional harms. | Bivens actions lie against individuals, not official-capacity defendants. | Yes; official-capacity claims not actionable under Bivens. |
| Whether district court properly dismissed with prejudice without leave to amend | Smith requests amendment to state viable claims. | Amendment would be futile; dismissal with prejudice appropriate. | Yes; dismissal with prejudice affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Whitesel v. Sengenberger, 222 F.3d 861 (10th Cir. 2000) (absolute judicial immunity extends to erroneous or in excess of authority acts)
- Robbins v. Oklahoma, 519 F.3d 1242 (10th Cir. 2008) (unattributed acts by multiple defendants require clarity to state a claim)
- Simmat v. U.S. Bureau of Prisons, 413 F.3d 1225 (10th Cir. 2005) (Bivens actions limited to individual capacity)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility pleading standard; must plead personal involvement)
- Brereton v. Bountiful City Corp., 434 F.3d 1213 (10th Cir. 2006) (standard for dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) and futility of amendment)
- Garrett v. Selby, Connor, Maddux & Janer, 425 F.3d 836 (10th Cir. 2005) (scurrilous tone can weigh against allowing pro se appeal)
- Krieger, 389 F. App’x 800 (10th Cir. 2010) (filing restrictions for persistent frivolous allegations against judges)
- Smith v. Plati, 258 F.3d 1167 (10th Cir. 2001) (First Amendment and access-to-courts considerations)