Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01848/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01848-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Keith A. Levy
Defendant
Paul Winfield
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Paul Winfield

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1848 FCD CMK P

vs.

Keith A. Levy,

Defendant. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. He brings this civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief

against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if it: (1) is frivolous or

malicious; (2) fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief

from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). 

Plaintiff brings this civil right action against Administrative Judge Keith Levy. 

Plaintiff alleges that defendant Levy subjected plaintiff to “double jeopardy and cruel and

unusual punishment” apparently because defendant Levy forced plaintiff to be medicated.

Plaintiff has named Administrative Law Judge Keith Levy as the defendant. Administrative Law

Judges, however, are absolutely immune from damage liability for acts performed in their

official capacity. 

Case 2:05-cv-01848-FCD-CMK Document 13 Filed 11/10/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Judges, and those performing judge-like functions are absolutely immune from

damage liability for acts performed in their official capacity. See Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d

1072, 1075 (9th Cir. 1986)(en banc). “Adjudication within a federal administrative agency

shares enough of the characteristics of the judicial process that those who participate in such

adjudication should be immune from § 1983 suits for damages.” Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S.

478, 512-13 (1978). Here, plaintiff alleges that, defendant, while acting in his official capacity

as an administrative law judge, damaged plaintiff by ordering plaintiff to take his medication. 

Accordingly, the court finds that defendant Levy is immune from suit. 

Because it does not appear possible that the deficiencies identified herein can be

cured by amending the complaint, plaintiff is not entitled to leave to amend prior to dismissal of

the entire action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126, 1131 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). 

Based on the foregoing, IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

because defendant Levy is immune from suit. 

These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States

District Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within

twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file

written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Findings

and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified

time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153

(9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: November 9, 2005.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-01848-FCD-CMK Document 13 Filed 11/10/05 Page 2 of 2