Deavenport

Deavenport v. Winley

Good Law
314 F. App'x 982
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 2, 2009No. 07-56570California412 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Paul Deavenport appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations and fraud in connection with an arbitration proceeding before the Ventura County Bar Association. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the dismissal based on judicial immunity, Harvey v. Waldron, 210 F.3d 1008, 1011 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Deavenport’s section 1983 claims against defendants Bolker and Andrews, the administrator of the arbitration program and the arbitrator, respectively, for failure to allege that they acted beyond the scope of their jurisdiction. See Cal. Bus. & Prof.Code § 6200(f) (providing that “an arbitrator or mediator, as well as the arbitrating association and its directors, officers, and employees, shall have the same immunity which attaches in judicial proceedings”); Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072, 1078 (9th Cir.1986) (concluding that plaintiffs failure to allege that a judicial officer acted “beyond the scope of the court’s jurisdiction” justifies dismissal).

The district court properly dismissed Deavenport’s section 1983…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.