Marcedes v. Barrett, 18492.
| Decision Date | 16 December 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 18492.,18492. |
| Citation | 453 F.2d 391 |
| Parties | Frank J. MARCEDES, Jr., Appellant, v. Thomas E. BARRETT, Clerk of Courts, et al. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Frank J. Marcedes, Jr., pro se.
Maurice Louik, County Sol., Craig T. Stockdale, Asst. County Sol., Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellees.
Before VAN DUSEN and ROSEN, Circuit Judges, and BECKER, District Judge.
This appeal is from a district court order dismissing for failure to state a "cause of action," a complaint filed under the Civil Rights Acts (42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985) against a Clerk of State Courts, a Supervisor on the staff of such Clerk, the Administrative Assistant to the President Judge of the Allegheny County Court,1 and the State Court Reporter who reported state criminal court proceedings2 resulting in a January 23, 1967, sentence imposing on plaintiff imprisonment for not less than 1½ nor more than 3 years. The complaint alleges that the refusal to furnish the notes of testimony denied "Plaintiff access to the courts" (page 5). In February 1967, plaintiff wrote the Clerk requesting a transcript of the criminal proceedings. On March 17, 1967, the President Judge wrote plaintiff that when the transcript had been "completed, a copy will be forwarded to the Institution where they will be available for inspection upon request of the Officials there."3 The complaint concludes by praying for (a) "damages in excess of $75,000 for causing plaintiff delay in submitting his grievances to the courts ...", (b) a court order "directing the defendants to make available copies of Trial Transcripts and Original Papers of Arrest and enjoining them from suppressing plaintiff from constructing his Legal Petitions," and (c) a court order directing that an alleged racist's picture be removed" from apparently the State Correctional Institution at Huntingdon (see pp. 9-10 of complaint).4
After careful consideration of the complaint, we have determined that "its failure to state facts in support of its conclusions," see Gaito v. Ellenbogen, 425 F.2d 845, 849 (3d Cir.1970); Negrich v. Hohn, 379 F.2d 213, 215 (3d Cir.1967), and the judicial immunity of the defendants, acting as judicial and quasi-judicial officials, require the conclusion that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint. See Bauers v. Heisel, 361 F.2d 581 (3d Cir.1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 1021, 87 S.Ct. 1367, 18 L.Ed.2d 457 (1967), and cases there cited; Lockhart v. Hoenstine, 411 F.2d 455, 459 (3d Cir.1969) (); Stewart v. Minnick, 409 F.2d 826 (9th Cir.1969) (); cf. Gaito v. Ellenbogen, supra, 425 F.2d at 849.
The district court order will be affirmed.
1 The only mention of defendant Carl M. Janavitz is that defendants "... confederate and conspire with Defendant Janavitz, in obstructing and suppressing Plaintiff's right to legal assistance ..." (p. 7 of Complaint), but the respondent's brief states his official position. The above-quoted language is insufficient to state a cause of action under the Civil Rights Acts. See Negrich v. Hohn, 379 F.2d 213, 215 (3d Cir.1967); Gaito v. Ellenbogen, 425 F.2d 845, 849 (3d Cir.1970).
2 Allegheny County, Pa., Court of Oyer & Terminer, No. 12, March 1966 Sessions, charging Armed Robbery and Receiving Stolen Goods.
3 The entire letter is as follows:
The docket book of the Allegheny County, Pa., Court of Oyer & Terminer, shows under No. 12, March 1966 Sessions, that two copies of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Boddorff v. Publicker Industries, Inc.
...criminal evidence", "obstruction of the administration of justice", and "conspiracy to inflict discrimination". In Marcedes v. Barrett, 453 F.2d 391 (3d Cir. 1971), still another pro se plaintiff alleged only that defendants "confederated and conspired with another defendant in obstructing ......
-
Gray v. Creamer
...we have continued to affirm the dismissal of actions which contain only vague and conclusory allegations. See, e. g., Marcedes v. Barrett, 453 F.2d 391 (3d Cir. 1971); United States ex rel. Birnbaum v. Dolan, 452 F.2d 1078 (3d Cir. 1971); Fletcher v. Hook, 446 F.2d 14 (3d Cir. 1971). There ......
-
District Council 47, American Federation of State, County and Mun. Employees, AFL-CIO by Cronin v. Bradley
...v. McCorkle, 462 F.2d 111, 112-14 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1042, 93 S.Ct. 529, 34 L.Ed.2d 492 (1972); Marcedes v. Barrett, 453 F.2d 391, 391-92 (3d Cir.1971) (per curiam); U.S. ex rel Birnbaum v. Dolan, 452 F.2d 1078, 1079 (3d Cir.1971); Fletcher v. Hook, 446 F.2d 14, 16 (3d Cir.19......
-
Raitport v. Provident Nat. Bank
...L.Ed.2d 492 (1972); Smith v. Rosenbaum, 460 F.2d 1019, 1020 (3d Cir. 1972) (per curiam) (alternative holding); Marcedes v. Barrett, 453 F.2d 391, 392 (3d Cir. 1971) (per curiam) (alternative holding); Henig v. Odorioso, 385 F.2d 491, 494 (3d Cir. 1967). See also Waits v. McGowan, 516 F.2d 2......