Shipley v. Homme

Filing 10

ORDER ADOPTING 7 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; denying 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; denying 3 Motion for Protective Order; DISMISSING 2 Complaint. Signed by Judge Susan P. Watters on 6/15/2015. Mailed to Shipley. (TAG, )

IN THE UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
BILLINGS DIVISION

FILED
JUN 15 2015
Clerk, U.S. District Court
District Of Montana
Billings

ROBERT SHIPLEY,
CV 15-36-BLG-SPW
Plaintiff,
ORDER

vs.
AL HOMME,
Defendant.

Plaintiff Robert Shipley brought this action against Al Homme, a city judge
in Miles City, Montana. Shipley alleges that Judge Homme illegally "reneged" on
his recusal from a misdemeanor criminal case. Shipley also claims that Judge
Homme illegally refused Shipley's attempts to pay $510 in cash as bail while
Shipley was in jail pending misdemeanor charges. United States Magistrate Judge
Carolyn Ostby issued Findings and Recommendations on May 22, 2015. Judge
Ostby concluded that Judge Homme is protected by judicial immunity and
recommends that this Court dismiss Shipley's Complaint. Shipley timely objected.
Therefore, this Court must review de novo the portions of the Findings and
Recommendations to which Shipley objects. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(B).
Shipley argues that Judge Homme is not entitled to judicial immunity.
Judicial officers cannot be held liable in civil actions, "even when such acts are in

1

excess of their jurisdiction, and are alleged to have been done maliciously or
corruptly." Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 356 (1978) (quoting Bradley v.

Fisher, 80 U.S. 335, 351 (1871)). Judicial immunity has only two recognized
exceptions: (1) actions not taken in a judicial capacity, and (2) actions taken in the
complete absence of all jurisdiction. Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991).
Taking Shipley's allegations as true, the Court finds that neither of the
exceptions to judicial immunity applies. Judge Homme's decision to preside over
a case in which he previously recused himself was taken in a judicial capacity.
Further, Shipley does not contest the Judge Homme has jurisdiction over such
misdemeanor cases. As to the second allegation, Judge Homme's refusal to accept
Shipley's cash as bail was also made in a judicial capacity, as he was presiding
over Shipley's case. Judge Homme also had jurisdiction to make bail decisions on
misdemeanor cases.
After a de novo review, the Court finds that Judge Ostby did not err in the
Findings and Recommendations. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. Judge Ostby's Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 7) are ADOPTED
IN FULL.
2. Shipley's Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1) is
DENIED.
3. Shipley's Complaint (Doc. 2) is DISMISSED.
2

4. Shipley's Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 3) is DENIED.
5. The Clerk of Court shall close this matter and enter judgment pursuant to
Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

DATED this

/...S

_'"-f£.
day of June, 2015.

;/

;>(4 ..~r7-~
SUSAN P. wATTERS
United States District Judge

3