Frederick Pitchford v. Denzil Marshall, Jr., et al

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: MORRIS S. ARNOLD, BOBBY E. SHEPHERD and KERMIT E. BYE (UNPUBLISHED) [3794269] [11-1166]

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________
No. 11-1166
___________
Frederick L. Pitchford,

*
*
Appellant,
*
* Appeal from the United States
v.
* District Court for the
* Eastern District of Arkansas.
Denzil Price Marshall, Jr., District
*
Judge, Personal Capacity; H. David
*
[UNPUBLISHED]
Young, Magistrate Judge, Personal
*
Capacity; Jane A. Kim, Attorney,
*
Officer of the Court,
*
*
Appellees.
*
___________
Submitted: May 24, 2011
Filed: June 6, 2011
___________
Before BYE, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Frederick Pitchford appeals the district court’s1 preservice dismissal of his civil
rights action. We conclude that dismissal was proper. See Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S.
9, 11-12 (1991) (per curiam) (judicial immunity); Kurtz v. City of Shrewsbury,

1

The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Arkansas.

Appellate Case: 11-1166

Page: 1

Date Filed: 06/06/2011 Entry ID: 3794269

245 F.3d 753, 758 (8th Cir. 2001) (requirements for conspiracy claim under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1985); Jensen v. Henderson, 315 F.3d 854, 863 (8th Cir. 2002) (42 U.S.C. § 1986
claim depends on existence of valid § 1985 claim). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th
Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 11-1166

Page: 2

Date Filed: 06/06/2011 Entry ID: 3794269