Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

492 F.2d 1298

Docket No. 73-1696.

McLallen v. Henderson

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Feb. 15, 1974.

Decided March 5, 1974.

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1974-03-05

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““This Court has held that court functionaries such as clerks are not clothed in judicial immunity because their duties are ministerial, not discretionary, in nature. Barnes v. Dorsey, 480 F.2d 1057 (8th Cir. 1973). Judicial immunity is only granted to non-judicial officials who, like judges, must not be unduly inhibited to exercise discretionary authority by the constant fear of personal liability for damages. * * * Reporters are like clerks, in that their duties are ministerial in nature and thus are not protected by quasi-judicial immunity.” 3”

quoted by 3 later decisions, including Antoine v. Byers & Anderson, Inc., Grant v. Fletcher

“can show that he was acting pursuant to his lawful authority and following in good faith the instructions and rules of the Court and was not in derogation of those instructions or rules...”

quoted by 3 later decisions, including Woods v. Dugan, 551 F. Supp. 325 - Woods v. Dugan

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on McCray v. Maryland · Barnes v. Dorsey

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Robert Vernon Denney · Decided 1974-03-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2000 · most notably Antoine v. Byers & Anderson, Inc. (1993), Slavin v. Curry (1978)

26 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

2701974198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*1299Lawrence M. Berkowitz, Kansas City, Mo., for appellant.

¶2Robert S. Drake, Jr., Warsaw, Mo., for appellee.

¶3Before HEANEY and BRIGHT, Circuit Judges, and DENNEY, District Judge.*

¶5DENNEY, District Judge.

¶6Appellant, McLallen, was convicted on May 8, 1972, in the Circuit Court of Benton County, Missouri, on four felony counts. On June 19, 1972, McLallen filed a notice of appeal of the convictions. The Circuit Court of Benton County found that appellant was unable to pay the costs of a transcript of the trial for the appeal and ordered the official court reporter, Henderson, the ap-pellee, to prepare such transcript and furnish a copy without cost to McLallen.

¶7On May 15, 1973, the transcript was finally delivered to McLallen’s counsel. On May 21, 1973, McLallen filed suit, alleging that Henderson had violated his civil rights protected by 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In particular, McLallen alleged that Henderson had denied McLallen his right to the transcript for an unreasonable period of time, for which he should have money damages. On motion of the appellee, the trial court dismissed the suit on the ground that the appellee was immune from suit under § 1983 because of the doctrine of judicial immunity. We reverse.

¶8This Court has held that court functionaries such as clerks are not clothed in judicial immunity because their duties are ministerial, not discretionary, in nature. Barnes v. Dorsey, 480 F.2d 1057 (8th Cir. 1973). Judicial immunity is only granted to non-judicial *1300officials who, like judges, must not be unduly inhibited to exercise discretionary authority by the constant fear of personal liability for damages. Applied to non-judicial officials, judicial immunity is termed quasi-judicial immunity and examples are prosecuting attorneys and parole board members. McCray v. State of Maryland, 456 F.2d 1 (4th Cir. 1972). Reporters are like clerks, in that their duties are ministerial in nature and thus are not protected by quasi-judicial immunity.

¶9However, this is not to say that clerks and court reporters may not have an absolute defense, sometimes referred to as a qualified immunity, to a suit for damages. Such is the case where the clerk, or reporter can show that he was acting pursuant to his lawful authority and following in good faith the instructions or rules of the Court and was not in derogation of those instructions or rules. Barnes v. Dorsey, supra.It will be for the trial court to determine upon remand whether appellee Henderson has properly raised and established that he was acting pursuant to his lawful authority or following an order of the court.

¶10Reversed and remanded.

/492/f2d/1298 · .json · Public domain