Bobrowsky v. Yonkers Courthouse

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that judge’s “rulings[, even though] adverse to plaintiff, [we]re the very essence of judicial functions and [could ]not, therefore, be the basis for liability” (some internal quotation marks omitted
• holding that judge’s refusal to recuse is covered by judicial immunity, and collecting cases
• reasoning that a judge’s decision to transfer a particular case to another court is typically a “judicial function.”
• holding that a judge’s decision to “issue a protective order . . . is clearly a judicial function, and there is no serious allegation that . . . [the judge] lacked all jurisdiction to issue the orders” in the matter before him
• finding no subject-matter jurisdiction under Rooker-Feldman, where plaintiff requested to “void . . . conviction entered by . . . state courts”
• citing, inter alia, Rhulen Agency, Inc. v. Ala. Ins. Guar. Ass’n, 896 F.2d 674, 678 (2d Cir. 1990)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).