Cross v. Bates-Anderson et al

Filing 16

ORDER AND REASONS: Granting 13 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Party Candice Bates-Anderson (In her official capacity as Chief Judge for Juvenile Court) is dismissed. Signed by Judge Jay C. Zainey on 10/24/2016. (ajn)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
DAPHNE CROSS

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO: 16-11626

CANDICE BATES-ANDERSON, ET
AL.

SECTION: "A" (4)

ORDER AND REASONS
The following motion is before the Court: Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 13)
filed by defendant Judge Candice Bates-Anderson. Plaintiff Daphne Cross (pro se),
mother of the minor X.F., has not filed an opposition to the motion. The motion, noticed
for submission on October 19, 2016, is before the Court on the briefs without oral
argument.
Plaintiff Daphne Cross has filed this § 1983 complaint pro se on behalf of her
minor son X.F. According to her complaint, Juvenile Court Judge Candice BatesAnderson presided over X.F.’s case wherein he was placed in the custody of the Bridge
City Center for Youth at the age of 15. Plaintiff complains that notwithstanding some
prior abuse at Bridge City Center that X.F. had endured in September 2014, the judge
decided to keep him there. On June 25, 2015, X.F. was attacked by some other youths
and had to be rushed to Children’s Hospital to have his ear sewn back on.
Defendant Cody Smith was an employee of Bridge City and the Court gleans from
the complaint that Plaintiff believes that Smith lied in Court about X.F.’s case.
Defendant Lemoyne Reine was X.F.’s probation officer, and defendant Daphne Johnson
Page 1 of 3

was Reine’s supervisor. Plaintiff alleges generally that her son’s federal constitutional
rights were violated by the defendants acting together. 1
Defendant Bates-Anderson moves to dismiss all claims against her.
The motion must be granted as to this defendant in her official capacity. The
well-settled law is that state officials in their official capacities are not “persons” under §
1983. See Will v. Mich. Dept. of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989).
The motion must also be granted as to claims asserted against this defendant in
her personal capacity. It is well-settled that judicial officers enjoy absolute immunity
from claims for damages arising out of acts performed in the exercise of their judicial
discretion. See Boyd v. Biggers, 31 F.3d 279, 284 (5th Cir. 1994) (citing Graves v.
Hampton, 1 F.3d 315, 317 (5th Cir. 1993)). The only exceptions to this immunity arise
when the acts are nonjudicial in nature or when the judge acts in the complete absence
of all jurisdiction. Id. (citing Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9 (1991)). Giving the complaint
the broadest interpretation, it is clear that the claims against Judge Bates-Anderson
derive from actions that she took in her judicial capacity, and that no exception to
absolute judicial immunity applies.
Accordingly, and for the foregoing reasons;

1

Plaintiff has also sued Ms. Tenee Felix, X.F.’s attorney.

Page 2 of 3

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 13) filed by
defendant Judge Candice Bates-Anderson is GRANTED. All claims against this
defendant are dismissed.
October 24, 2016
JAY C. ZAINEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 3 of 3