Paul Hupp v. Jeffrey Freedman , 569 F. App'x 501 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            APR 14 2014
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    PAUL HUPP,                                       No. 12-55175
    Plaintiff - Appellant,            D.C. No. 3:11-cv-02337-IEG-RBB
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    JEFFREY HOWARD FREEDMAN,
    individually and in his official capacity as
    “Pro Tem Administrative Law Judge”,
    individually, jointly, and severally,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of California
    Irma E. Gonzalez, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted April 7, 2014**
    Before:        TASHIMA, GRABER, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
    Paul Hupp appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his
    42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations and state law claims in
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    connection with the denial of his application for a temporary teaching permit. We
    review de novo. Sadosky v. Mosley, 
    435 F.3d 1076
    , 1077 n.1 (9th Cir. 2006). We
    affirm.
    The district court properly dismissed Hupp’s action because Freedman is
    entitled to judicial immunity. See Olsen v. Idaho State Bd. of Med., 
    363 F.3d 916
    ,
    923 (9th Cir. 2004) (explaining that judges functioning in their judicial capacities
    are generally entitled to judicial immunity and setting fourth factors for
    determining whether an official’s functions are quasi-judicial in nature); Hirsch v.
    Justices of the Supreme Court, 
    67 F.3d 708
    , 715 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curium)
    (concluding that administrative law judges are entitled to quasi-judicial immunity);
    O’Neil v. City of Lake Oswego, 
    642 F.2d 367
    , 368-70 (9th Cir. 1981) (extending
    judicial immunity to a pro tem judge and discussing the distinction between acts
    taken “in clear absence of all jurisdiction” and those taken merely “in excess of
    jurisdiction”).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                   12-55175
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-55175

Citation Numbers: 569 F. App'x 501

Judges: Tashima, Graber, Ikuta

Filed Date: 4/14/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024