Kadivar v. Stone, 86-5146
| Decision Date | 19 November 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 86-5146,86-5146 |
| Citation | 804 F.2d 635 |
| Parties | Hooshang KADIVAR, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Robert STONE, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Non-Argument Calendar. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
James E. Alderman, Swann & Haddock, P.A., Ft. Peirce, Fla., Marguerite H. Davis, Swann & Haddock, P.A., Tallahassee, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., for State of Fla., Tallahassee, Fla., Salvatore Carpino, Freeman & Lopez, Tampa, Fla., for defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
Before GODBOLD, VANCE and JOHNSON, Circuit Judges.
CORRECTED OPINION
Dr. Kadivar filed a 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 complaint against four attorneys in the St. Lucie [Florida] State Attorney's Office; two state court judges; Joseph Lawrence, the chief attorney for the Florida Department of Professional Regulation (DPR); the members of the Florida Board of Medical Examiners; and Deletha Spooner, who had complained to the St. Lucie County Police Department about his conduct during her physical examination. Kadivar alleged that the defendant state attorneys investigating Spooner's complaint acted to prejudice his case and conspired with other defendants to terminate his license to practice medicine in Florida, all under color of law. He claimed that Lawrence and the DPR violated his constitutional rights to due process and equal protection of the laws in the conduct of the administrative proceedings brought against him. Kadivar also alleged that the Board violated his constitutional rights to due process and equal protection in reaching its decision to revoke his license and that the judges violated his constitutional rights in reaching their respective decisions. Finally, Kadivar alleged that Spooner conspired with defendant state attorneys and Lawrence under color of state law to deny Kadivar his constitutional rights to due process and equal protection of the laws in both the administrative and criminal proceedings.
The district court dismissed all claims against all defendants with prejudice and Kadivar appealed. We hold that the district court erred in dismissing Dr. Kadivar's complaint against the state attorneys and Lawrence on grounds of absolute immunity. In addition, the district court erred in dismissing the complaint against Spooner on the ground that Dr. Kadivar failed to plead facts that would support a finding of involvement by Spooner in a conspiracy to deprive plaintiff of his constitutional rights. 1
The immunity available to a prosecutor turns upon the functional nature of his activities rather than upon his status. A prosecutor has absolute immunity only when engaged in activities intimately associated with the judicial process, such as initiating a prosecution and presenting the state's case. Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 96 S.Ct. 984, 47 L.Ed.2d 128 (1976); Marrero v. City of Hialeah, 625 F.2d 499 (5th Cir.1980). Although a prosecutor enjoys absolute immunity when engaging in quasi-judicial functions, he has only a qualified immunity when carrying out administrative or investigative functions. Marrero, 625 F.2d at 504-05. It is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bradt v. West
...with the judicial phase of the criminal process. Enlow v. Tishomingo County, 962 F.2d 501, 511 (5th Cir.1992); Kadivar v. Stone, 804 F.2d 635, 637 (11th Cir.1986). Under the functional approach, a prosecutor's acts that are "intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal proc......
-
Rowe v. City of Fort Lauderdale
...not afford a remedy against a private person unless a conspiracy with one or more state actors is properly alleged. Kadivar v. Stone, 804 F.2d 635, 637 (11th Cir.1986). Moreover, it is undisputed that Doss was never a state employee or official at any time material to this Doss asserts that......
-
Zivojinovich v. Ritz Carlton Hotel Co., LLC, 2:05-cv-263-FtM-29SPC.
...action for participating in the conspiracy regardless of whether the state officials are themselves immune from suit." Kadivar v. Stone, 804 F.2d 635, 636 (11th Cir. 1986). The Court agrees with plaintiffs that the Amended Complaint sufficiently alleges that Barner, as an agent for the Ritz......
-
Holsey v. Hind
...functions, he has only a qualified immunity when carrying out administrative or investigative functions." Kadivar v. Stone, 804 F.2d 635, 637 (11th Cir.1986), citing Marrero v. City of Hialeah, 625 F.2d 499, 504-05 (5th Cir.1980). Thus, our initial concern in this case is within the thresho......