Falkoff v. Donovan
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Pinkesz Mutual Holdings, LLC v. Pinkesz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- Mickens v. State (N.Y. Ct. Cl. 2009)
- Alex-Mitchell v. State (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Roberto, J.), dated January 27, 1997, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint and denied his cross motion for summary judgment in his favor.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Judges and those who perform similar functions, such as Hearing Examiners, “ ‘ “are not liable to civil actions for their judicial acts, even when such acts are in excess of their jurisdiction, and are alleged to have been done maliciously and corruptly”” (Colin v County of Suffolk, 181 AD2d 653, 654, quoting Stump v Sparkman, 435 US 349, 356). However, although a Judge will not be deprived of immunity because the action he or she took was in excess of authority, he or she will be subject to liability when action was taken in the “clear absence of all jurisdiction” (Stump v Sparkman, supra, at 357). In the present case, the plaintiff has failed to proffer evidence demonstrating that the defendant performed any acts in the clear absence of all jurisdiction. Bracken, J. P., Pizzuto, Altman, Krausman and Lerner, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.