Capogrosso v. the Supreme Court of New Jersey

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that members of New Jersey’s 5 Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct, who investigate claims of judicial misconduct, were entitled to quasi-judicial immunity
• stating that state officials sued in their individual capacities were entitled to quasi-judicial immunity and thus not subject to suit for injunctive relief
• stating that, “the rule is clear that allegations of a conspiracy must provide some factual basis to support the existence of the elements of a conspiracy: agreement and concerted action”
• limiting review to only those issues raised in litigant’s appeal brief because appellant was an experienced pro se litigant
• affirming dismissal of § 1983 claims against judges for their “alleged judicial misconduct in [the plaintiff]’s state court cases”
• noting “individual citizens do not have a constitutional right to the prosecution of alleged criminals”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).