Norman Burkes, Jr. v. Luther Callion, Deputy Central Adult Investigations, Etc.
Cases that cite this one
105 later published cases cite this decision. The 24 that cite it most often are listed here.
- In re Scott County Master Docket (D. Minn. 1985)
- Omar Gay v. Amy Parsons (9th Cir. 2023)
- Pomerantz v. County of Los Angeles (9th Cir. 1982)
- Albert William Demoran v. F.A. Witt and John Does 1-4. (9th Cir. 1986)
- John Larry Ray v. Patricia Pickett, J. Alan MacDoniel U.S. Parole Commissioner (8th Cir. 1984)
- Erlebach v. RAJ Enterprises of Central Florida (United States District Court for the District of Idaho 2022)
- Gilmore v. Bostic (District Court, S.D. West Virginia 2009)
- Miller v. Niblack (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996)
- Murray E. Fields v. Elizabeth Maceo Richard Rogers Lee Fischler Robert McCannally Claudia Holband (9th Cir. 1995)
- Ursula Straub v. Robert F. Cary David Paris (9th Cir. 1994)
- Kaufhold v. Bright (District Court, W.D. Virginia 1993)
- Leonard John Hodgson v. Robbie Waters, Sacramento County Sheriff Detective Humphrey Mark G. Smith Tony Goodman Angela M. Curiale (9th Cir. 1992)
- Frank R. Borders v. Mark Allan Alan Traywick (9th Cir. 1992)
- Taggart v. State (Wash. 1992)
- Collins on Behalf of Collins v. Tabet (N.M. 1991)
- Cooney v. Park County (Wyo. 1990)
- Bruce v. Byrne-Stevens & Associates Engineers, Inc. (Wash. 1989)
- LaLonde v. Eissner (Mass. 1989)
- Cynthia A. Forrester v. Judge Howard Lee White (7th Cir. 1986)
- Harlow v. Clatterbuck (Va. 1986)
- Donahoo v. State (Ala. 1985)
- Pomerantz v. County Of Los Angeles (9th Cir. 1982)
- Hulsman v. Hemmeter Development Corp. (Haw. 1982)
- Harry Franklin v. State of Oregon, State Welfare Division (9th Cir. 1981)
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
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.
. 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.
. 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.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.