TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Norman Burkes, Jr. v. Luther Callion, Deputy Central Adult Investigations, Etc.

Norman BURKES, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Luther CALLION, Deputy Central Adult Investigations, Etc., Et Al., Defendants-Appellees

Burkes v. Callion, 433 F.2d 318 (9th Cir. 1970)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
November 4, 1970
Docket
No. 24611_1
Judges
Barnes, Browning, Duniway, Per Curiam
Citations
433 F.2d 3181970 U.S. App. LEXIS 6639

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Appellant brought this civil rights damage action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2) against Luther Callion, a Deputy Probation Officer for Los Angeles County, and Dr. George Abe and Dr. Alvin Davis, court-appointed medical examiners, 1

alleging that he was sentenced to state prison rather than granted probation because the defendants made false statements of fact and omitted material facts in making their respective reports to the state court. The district court dismissed the complaint on the grounds that the defendants were immune from liability under the Act. We affirm.

This circuit has repeatedly held that judges and other officers of government whose duties are related to the judicial process are immune from liability for damages under section 1983 for conduct in the performance of their official duties.

See, e. g., Agnew v. Moody, 330 F.2d 868 (9th Cir. 1964); Harmon v. Superior Court, 329 F.2d 154 (9th Cir. 1964); Sires v. Cole, 320 F.2d 877 (9th Cir. 1963). A probation officer preparing and submitting a probation report in a criminal case is performing a “quasi-judicial” function and is entitled to a similar, if not the same, immunity that is accorded to judges for acts done by them in the exercise of their judicial functions. Harmon v. Superior Court, supra; Friedman v. Younger, 282 F.Supp. 710, 715-716 (C.D.Cal.1968); Dunn v. Estes, 117 F.Supp. 146 (D.Mass.1953).

We hold that the court-appointed psychiatrists who prepared' and submitted medical reports to the state court are also immune from liability for damages under the Act.

2

The function of the examining psychiatrists in this case falls within the scope of “quasi-judicial immunity,” defined by this court in Robichaud v. Ronan, 351 F.2d 533, 536 (9th Cir. 1965), to extend to acts committed “in the performance of an integral part of the judicial process.”

Affirmed.

1

. Defendants Abe and Davis were appointed by the Superior Court of Los Angeles pursuant to Calif.Penal Code § 1027 to conduct an examination of appellant in order to determine his sanity at the time of a homicide offense.

2

. This case is distinguishable from Jobson v. Henne, 355 F.2d 129 (2d Cir. 1966), where the Second Circuit refused immunity to state-employed psychiatrists who allegedly caused the inmate of a state mental institution to perform involuntary servitude under the guise of therapeutic treatment. In that case the psychiatrists did not act pursuant to a court order and their acts were not related to the judicial process.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 5 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 98 cases

View all citing references →
1971: 11972: 11974: 11975: 11976: 21977: 11978: 41979: 21980: 21981: 31982: 21983: 41984: 61985: 51986: 81987: 21988: 21989: 41990: 41991: 11992: 31993: 41994: 31995: 31996: 11998: 32002: 12004: 12005: 12007: 12009: 12010: 22012: 12014: 12019: 12020: 52021: 22022: 42023: 22025: 219712026peak 1986 · 8

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Scott County Master Docket618 F. Supp. 1534 (D. Minnesota 1985)
  2. Pomerantz v. County of Los Angeles674 F.2d 1288 (9th Cir. 1982)
  3. Omar Gay v. Amy Parsons61 F.4th 1088 (9th Cir. 2023)
  4. Albert William Demoran v. F.A. Witt and John Does 1-4.781 F.2d 155 (9th Cir. 1986)
  5. John Larry Ray v. Patricia Pickett, J. Alan MacDoniel U.S. Parole Commissioner734 F.2d 370 (8th Cir. 1984)
  6. LaLonde v. Eissner539 N.E.2d 538 (Mass. 1989)

Most recent

  1. Daniel L. Crowder v. Kimberly BurressNo. 1:24-cv-00059 (W.D.N.C. Dec. 22, 2025)
  2. Snyder v. PO PaloskaNo. 2:24-cv-02302 (D. Nev. June 20, 2025)
  3. Omar Gay v. Amy Parsons61 F.4th 1088 (9th Cir. 2023)
  4. Zapata v. State of MontanaNo. 4:21-cv-00079 (D. Mont. Mar. 3, 2023)
  5. Sachs v. BrantonNo. 2:22-cv-00008 (D. Ariz. Sept. 14, 2022)
  6. Spriestersbach v. State of HawaiiNo. 1:21-cv-00456 (D. Haw. Aug. 18, 2022)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 7

DepthCaseCited by
Harmon v. The Superior Court of the State of Cal., 329 F.2d 154 (9th Cir. 1964) 28
Robichaud v. Ronan, 351 F.2d 533 (9th Cir. 1965) 149
Jobson v. Henne, 355 F.2d 129 (2d Cir. 1966) 121
R. W. Agnew v. Moody, 330 F.2d 868 (9th Cir. 1964) 107
Sires v. Cole, 320 F.2d 877 (9th Cir. 1963) 65
Friedman v. Younger, 282 F. Supp. 710 (C.D. Cal. 1968) 26
Dunn v. Estes, 117 F. Supp. 146 (D. Mass. 1953) 11

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list