Christopher Steg v. James Johnson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:16-cv-00149-BO Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999939771]. Mailed to: Steg. [16-1654]

Appeal: 16-1654

Doc: 7

Filed: 10/03/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1654

CHRISTOPHER B. STEG; CAYLA B. STEG,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
JAMES H. JOHNSON; CONRAD BOYD STURGES, III; DAVIS, STURGES
AND TOMLINSON, Lawyers; BETTY LYNN CURRIN; BETTY JOHNSON;
KIMBERLY J. ROGERS; ROGERS AND ROGERS, Lawyers; AMY J.
PERALTA; RANDOLPH A. BASKERVILLE; J. HENRY BANKS; CAROLINE
S. BURNETTE; SAMUEL B. CURRIN, III,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:16-cv-00149-BO)

Submitted:

September 29, 2016

Decided:

October 3, 2016

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher B. Steg; Cayla B. Steg, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1654

Doc: 7

Filed: 10/03/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Christopher
order

and

dismissing

record

and

properly

Cayla

their

find

no

dismissed

Steg

civil

action.

reversible

the

42

appeal

the
We

error. 1

U.S.C.

district
have

court’s

reviewed

The
(2012)

§ 1983

district
claim

the

court
on

the

grounds that the defendants were immune from such claims, see
Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 356-57 (1978) (judges entitled
to

absolute

immunity

unless

acing

in

“clear

absence

of

jurisdiction”); Dababnah v. Keller-Burnside, 208 F.3d 467, 470
(4th

Cir.

2000)

(“A

prosecutor

enjoys

absolute

immunity

for

prosecutorial functions intimately associated with the judicial
phase

of

the

criminal

process.”

(internal

quotation

marks

omitted)); Fleming v. Asbill, 42 F.3d 886, 889 (4th Cir. 1994)
(guardians

ad

litem

immune

from

§ 1983

claims

for

actions

“occurr[ing] within the judicial process”), or were not acting
under color of state law.
rejected

federal

civil

Additionally, the court correctly

conspiracy

1

claim

and

did

not

err

in

After the district court issued its order and judgment,
which relied in part on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, we issued
an opinion clarifying the narrow scope of the doctrine.
Thana
v. Bd. of License Commissioners for Charles Cty., Md., 827 F.3d
314 (4th Cir. 2016).
However, because the district court
provided alternate and sufficient bases for rejecting all of the
Stegs’ claims, we find it unnecessary to consider whether the
court’s Rooker-Feldman analysis is in line with Thana.

2

Appeal: 16-1654

Doc: 7

Filed: 10/03/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state
law claims.

Accordingly, we affirm.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions

are

adequately

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3