Jack R. Harper v. Arden Mays Merckle

How courts have described this case

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

• holding a contempt proceeding and ordering plaintiff incarcerated were not judicial acts where controversy that led to incarceration did not center around any matter pending before the Judge, but around domestic problems of plaintiff's former wife who worked at the courthouse
• a crucial policy basis supporting the doctrine of judicial immunity is the need to avoid vexatious litigation against judges and the need for an end to litigation
• “[W]e can envision no situation – where a judge acts after he is approached qua judge by parties to a case – that could possibly spawn a successful § 1983 suit.”
• judge used his judicial office as an offensive weapon to vindicate personal objectives, and no party had invoked the judicial machinery for any purpose, such that the judge’s actions were not “judicial acts” entitled to immunity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).