Sibley v. U.S. Supreme Court

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the plaintiffs claims against the clerk and the deputy clerk were barred because the clerk and the deputy clerk were entitled to judicial immunity (citing Reddy, 520 F.Supp.2d at 130)
• holding that the plaintiff’s claims against the clerk and the deputy clerk were barred because the clerk and the deputy clerk were entitled to judicial immunity (citing Reddy, 520 F. Supp. 2d at 130)
• finding that allegedly dismissing prior case and refusing to timely rule on motion judicial in nature
• finding that the “receipt and processing of a litigant’s filings are part and parcel of the process of adjudicating cases”
• finding that clerks’ failure to file pleadings and refusal to correct docketing error are parts of adjudicative process and thus covered under judicial immunity
• “In the absence of explicit statutory authorization, bodies within the District of Columbia government are not suable as separate entities.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).