Northern Virginia Women's Medical Center v. Balch

Decision Date14 March 1980
Docket NumberNos. 78-1673,78-1674 and 79-1161,s. 78-1673
Citation617 F.2d 1045
PartiesNORTHERN VIRGINIA WOMEN'S MEDICAL CENTER; Thomas H. Gresinger, M.D.; Jane Doe; Sharon McCann; William Longstreth; Christine Diermeier, Appellees, v. Thomas BALCH; Diane Bodner; David H. Gaetano; Brigid Kenney; Mary Ann Kreitzer; Kathy McDonald; Florence Smith; Mary Kay Stine; Leszek Syski; Karen Ann Torres; Joan Vayl, Appellants, and Robert F. Horan, Jr., Individually and in his official capacity; Honorable Lewis Hall Griffith, Judge; Honorable A. Mason Grove, Judge; Colonel Richard King, Chief of Police, Fairfax County Police Department, Defendants. NORTHERN VIRGINIA WOMEN'S MEDICAL CENTER; Thomas H. Gresinger, M.D.; Jane Doe; Sharon McCann; William Longstreth; Christine Diermeier, Appellants, v. Robert F. HORAN, Jr., Individually and in his official capacity; Honorable Lewis Hall Griffith, Judge; Honorable A. Mason Grove, Judge, Appellees, and Thomas Balch; Diane Bodner; David J. Gaetano; Brigid Kenney; Mary Ann Kreitzer; Leszek Syski; Karen Ann Torres; Joan Vayl, Defendants. NORTHERN VIRGINIA WOMEN'S MEDICAL CENTER; Thomas H. Gresinger, M.D.; Jane Doe; Sharon McCann; William Longstreth; Christine Diermeier, Appellees, v. Diane BODNER, David J. Gaetano, Jeanne Miller, Mary Elizabeth McKernan, Appellants, and Robert F. Horan, Jr., Individually and in his official capacity; Honorable Lewis Hall Griffith, Judge; Honorable A. Mason Grove, Judge; Colonel Richard King, Chief of Police, Fairfax County Police Department; Thomas Balch; Diane Bodner; David J. Gaetano; Brigid Kenney; Mary Ann Kreitzer; Kathy McDonald; Florence Smith; Mary Kay Stine; Leszek Syski; Karen Ann Torres; Joan Vayl, Defendants.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

Victor M. Glasberg, Alexandria, Va. (Philip J. Hirschkop, Hirschkop & Grad, P. C., Alexandria, Va., on brief), for Northern Virginia Women's Medical Center, et al.

Steve Merrill, Com. Atty. for Fairfax County, Fairfax, Va., for Robert F. Horan, Jr., et al.

James E. Moore, Asst. Atty. Gen., Richmond, Va. (Marshall Coleman, Atty. Gen. of Va., and Valentine W. Southall, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Richmond, Va., on brief), for Grove and Griffin.

John J. Brandt, Arlington, Va., for Balch, et al.

Judith Levin, New York City (Janet Benshoof, New York City, Ellen Leitzer, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Albuquerque, N. M., Steven W. Bricker, American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, Richmond, Va., on brief), for Northern Virginia Women's Medical Center, et al.

Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, and WINTER and BUTZNER, Circuit Judges.

BUTZNER, Circuit Judge:

These appeals are taken from orders of the district court in an action brought by the Northern Virginia Women's Medical Center, several members of its staff, and a patient against the commonwealth attorney, the chief of police, two judges of Fairfax County, Virginia (officials), and Thomas Balch and others (citizens). The complaint sought declaratory and injunctive relief establishing the right of the Center, its staff, and patients to perform and obtain legal abortions without interference from trespasses committed by the citizens in complicity with the officials. Jurisdiction was predicated on 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1985(3), supplementary jurisdictional sections of Title 28 U.S.C., and pendent jurisdiction based on Virginia law.

The citizens filed a counterclaim in which they sought a declaration that all laws allowing abortion are unconstitutional, an injunction against the Center restraining it from performing abortions, the recovery of compensatory damages for the life of each unborn child aborted at the Center, additional damages for each counterclaimant, and punitive damages. The counterclaim invoked the same federal jurisdictional statutes to which the complaint made reference and pendent jurisdiction.

The district court dismissed the officials, dismissed the counterclaim, and enjoined the citizens from trespassing on the property of the Center or interfering with its operations. Subsequently, after some of the citizens violated this injunction, the district court cited them for contempt, imposing fines and a short period of probation. The Center assigns error to the dismissal of the commonwealth attorney and the judges, but it has withdrawn its appeal from the order dismissing the chief of police. The citizens assign error to the injunction, the convictions for contempt, and the dismissal of their counterclaim. Finding no error in any of these assignments, we affirm.

I

The parties have agreed on a statement of facts for the purpose of appeal in lieu of a transcript of the two-day trial. As reflected by this statement, the uncontradicted evidence discloses that the Center is licensed by Virginia to perform abortions as an out-patient hospital and that it provides, among other services, first trimester abortions. The citizens believe abortion is killing and that in preventing abortions they save lives. They agreed among themselves to prevent women from having abortions and to prevent the Center from providing abortions. The statement of facts stipulated that "pursuant to their agreement, they embarked upon a series of actions involving entering upon the clinic's premises, blocking doors to procedure rooms and blocking access to the Center."

Three times in 1977 and twice in 1978 various members of the citizens group trespassed at the Center to prevent abortions. On each occasion some of them refused to leave the premises at the request of the police. They barred admission to one of the plaintiffs, a patient, who sought to keep an appointment for an abortion. Only the intervention of the police enabled her to enter the Center.

A deposition of a police officer, to which reference is made in the statement of facts, described one of the incidents. His testimony disclosed that some of the citizens locked arms in front of the Center's exterior door to bar ingress. Others entered the building screaming while they tried to gain entrance to a locked room. One man attempted to force his way past the officer into the room. Realizing that he alone could not cope with the situation, the officer summoned more police. The citizens, however, refused to heed the officer's request to leave, and the police had to remove them from the premises.

On every occasion the citizens were arrested. The criminal charges, however, were either nol prossed or dismissed. One of the county judges acquitted the citizens on the ground that they believed their trespasses were necessary to save lives. The other judge ruled that Va.Code Ann. § 18.2-72, which permits first trimester abortions, was unconstitutional.

II

Initially the Center sought damages against both the officials and the citizens. The district court granted the judges' motion to dismiss for failure of the complaint to state a claim against them. We find no error in this ruling.

The judges were entitled to immunity from damages. 1 Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 98 S.Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978). The Center argues on appeal that the judges should not have been dismissed because it is entitled to a declaration that their judgments were erroneous, particularly with respect to the constitutionality of the Virginia abortion statute. This relief however, was not warranted. The judgments of acquittal entered by the county judges in the prosecutions of the citizens were final. The guarantee of the double jeopardy clause barred retrial. A declaration on the invalidity of these judgments would have been nothing more than a gratuitous comment without any force or effect. In short, there was no case or controversy between the Center and the judges. Under these circumstances, the district court properly declined to review the judgments of the county court. Golden v. Zwickler, 394 U.S. 103, 108, 89 S.Ct. 956, 959, 22 L.Ed.2d 113 (1969).

III

The parties stipulated at the trial that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
26 cases
  • Society of Separationists, Inc. v. Herman
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • April 17, 1992
    ...v. Moore, 948 F.2d 517, 521-22 (9th Cir.1991); Foster v. Basham, 932 F.2d 732 (8th Cir.1991); Northern Virginia Women's Medical Center v. Balch, 617 F.2d 1045, 1048-49 (9th Cir.1980); see also Brown v. Edwards, 721 F.2d 1442, 1446-47 (5th We must not shrink from our duty to decide a controv......
  • Women's Health Care Services v. Operation Rescue
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Kansas
    • August 7, 1991
    ...Center, Inc. v. McMonagle, 665 F.Supp. 1147 (E.D.Pa.1987), aff'd, 868 F.2d 1342 (3rd Cir.1989). See also Northern Virginia Women's Medical Center v. Balch, 617 F.2d 1045 (4th Cir. 1980). But cf. Mississippi Women's Medical Clinic v. McMillan, 866 F.2d 788, 794 (5th Cir.1989); Roe v. Abortio......
  • NAT. ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN v. Operation Rescue
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Virginia
    • December 6, 1989
    ...goals. 43. It is well established that these trespass statutes prohibit the conduct at issue here. Northern Virginia Women's Medical Center v. Balch, 617 F.2d 1045, 1049 (4th Cir.1980) (abortion clinic's action against demonstrators based on violations of trespass statutes). And, evidence a......
  • Ragsdale v. Turnock
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • August 12, 1988
    ...Elections v. Socialist Workers Party, 440 U.S. 173, 187, 99 S.Ct. 983, 992, 59 L.Ed.2d 230 (1979)). In Northern Virginia Women's Medical Center v. Balch, 617 F.2d 1045 (4th Cir.1980), an even more questionable assurance of discontinuance was held to moot the controversy. There, a local pros......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT