In Brooks v. Clark County, published July 7, 2016, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an order denying a courtroom marshal's motion to dismiss a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 lawsuit alleging that the marshal used excessive force in carrying out a judge's order to remove a bail enforcement agent from the judge's courtroom. The 9th Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling that the marshal was not entitled to absolute judicial immunity. The court found no policy reason to extend that immunity to courtroom officials such as bailiffs and marshals. Instead, the acts of those officials are protected by qualified immunity.
The 9th Circuit nevertheless ruled that based on the allegations of the complaint, the marshal was entitled to qualified immunity. The marshal was entitled to qualified immunity unless, assuming the plaintiff's allegations were true, it was beyond debate that the amount of force the marshal used violated the Constitution. The transcript shows that before the marshal removed the plaintiff, the plaintiff twice defied the judge's order to leave, and that two of the plaintiff's compatriots did the same. Given the chaos in the courtroom, and the undisputed evidence that the plaintiff intended to disobey the judge's orders, combined with the bare-bones allegations in the complaint that the marshal forcefully shoved him through double-doors injuring the plaintiff's back, it was not beyond debate that the marshal employed an unreasonable amount of force.
Comments