Krause

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Alanna Krause appeals the district court’s order granting defendant Sandra Acevedo’s motion to dismiss on the ground that Acevedo was entitled to quasi-judicial immunity. Acevedo served as Krause’s court-appointed attorney for a year during Krause’s parents’ dissolution proceeding when Krause was a child. When Krause turned eighteen, she instituted the current diversity action in federal court alleging malpractice and intentional infliction of emotional distress among other claims. All of the other parties settled after the district court granted Acevedo’s motion to dismiss, leaving that decision as the only issue on appeal.

Because this case is in federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction, this court must apply California substantive law. See Feldman v. Allstate Ins. Co., 322 F.3d 660, 666 (9th Cir.2003). Under California law, “[ijmmunity exists for judicial actions; those relating to a function normally performed by a judge and where the parties understood they were dealing with the judge in his official capacity.” Howard v. Drapkin, 222 Cal.App.3d 843 , 852 n. 3, 271 Cal.Rptr. 893 (1990) (internal citations and quotations omitted).…