Easter v. Lafourche Parish District Attorney's Office et al
Filing
6
ORDER AND REASONS ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 with clarification. Signed by Judge Helen G. Berrigan on 08/06/2014.(kac)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
RANDY ALLEN EASTER
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
No. 13-5849
The 17th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COURT FOR LAFOURCHE PARISH and the
LAFOURCHE PARISH DISTRICT
ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
Section C(4)
ORDER and REASONS1
Before the court is an action under 42 U.S.C. §1983 brought pro se by plaintiff,
Randy Allen Easter. Rec. Doc. 3. The Magistrate Judge reviewed the complaint pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. §636 (b) and (c), §1915(e)2 and §1915A, and recommended that this court
dismiss this action as frivolous and for failing to state a claim for which relief can be
granted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. Having reviewed the Report and
Recommendations, as well as the pleadings and applicable law, this Court finds that the
Magistrate’s recommendations, with some clarification, do correctly lead to the dismissal
of this claim.
I. Claims against the 17th Judicial District Court of Lafourche Parish
The Magistrate Judge correctly found that the 17th Judicial District Court for the
Parish of Lafourche is not a “person” under §1983 and has immunity from suit via the
Eleventh Amendment. See Jefferson v. Louisiana State Supreme Court, 46 F. App'x 732
(5th Cir. 2002); Moity v. Louisiana State Bar Ass'n, 414 F. Supp. 180, 182 (E.D. La.
1976) aff'd, 537 F.2d 1141 (5th Cir. 1976); Wilkerson v. 17th Judicial Dist. Court, Parish
of Lafourche, No. 08-1196, 2009 WL 249737, at *3 (E.D. La. Jan. 30, 2009); Rackley v.
1
Ardis Strong, a second-year student at Brooklyn Law School, assisted with the preparation of this order.
Louisiana, No. 07-504, 2007 WL 1792524, at *3 (E.D. La. June 21, 2007). Judges also
enjoy absolute immunity from liability for their judicial acts. Forrester v. White, 484 U.S.
219, 225 (1988). This is designed to preserve appellate review as the procedure for
correcting judicial error. Id. Thus, amending the complaint to add 17th Judicial District
Judge Ashley Simpson, would not change the outcome of this review. Rec. Doc. 5 at 4.
Judge Simpson issued a decision on Easter’s claim of illegal detention in February of
2012, Rec. Doc. 3 at 8. Therefore, Easter must pursue this claim through the state
appeals process, not through a §1983 action.
II. Claims against the Lafourche Parish District Attorney’s Office
A parish District Attorney’s office is considered “an independent local
government entity” for the purpose of §1983 and therefore does not enjoy the qualified
immunity of the state courts. Burge v. Parish of St. Tammany, 187 F.3d 452, 469-470
(5th Cir. 1999), see also Connick v. Thompson, 131 S. Ct. 1350, 1359 (2011); Mairena v.
Foti, 816 F.2d 1061, 1064 (5th Cir. 1987). Thus, it is possible that Easter could bring an
action against the Lafourche Parish District Attorney’s office, or District Attorney
Camille Morvant, if Easter can properly allege that Morvant showed deliberate
indifference to official policies leading to the violations of rights alleged in the complaint.
See Burge, 187 F.3d. at 466.
In this case, Easter’s pleadings do not contain adequate factual allegations of
deliberate indifference to civil rights’ violations by the Lafourche District Attorney’s
Office or District Attorney Morvant. Rather, Easter alleges that the District Attorney
arraigned him on an incorrect charge. However, this is not a valid claim under a §1983
action. “When ‘a judgment in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the
2
invalidity of his conviction or sentence,’ the Court held, § 1983 is not an available
remedy.” Skinner v. Switzer, 131 S. Ct. 1289, 1298 (2011) (quoting Heck v. Humphrey,
512 U.S. 477, 487 (1994)). Furthermore, “when a state prisoner is challenging the very
fact or duration of his physical imprisonment, and the relief he seeks is a determination
that he is entitled to immediate release or a speedier release from that imprisonment, his
sole federal remedy is a writ of habeas corpus.” Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500
(1973). Because what Easter essentially seeks is a shorter sentence, a §1983 action is not
appropriate for this claim.
III. Conclusion
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff, Randy Allen Easter’s claims
against defendants, the Lafourche Parish District Attorney’s Office and the 17th Judicial
District Court for the Parish of Lafourche, be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as
frivolous and otherwise for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 6th day of August, 2014.
_____________________________
HELEN G. BERRIGAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?