UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

KENT VU PHAN, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

ELIZABETH B. VOLZ, Judge; DANIEL 

T. JACOBS, Attorney, 

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 21-1199

(D.C. No. 1:21-CV-00965-LTB-GPG)

(D. Colo.)

_________________________________

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

_________________________________

Before McHUGH, MORITZ, and ROSSMAN, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

Plaintiff Kent Vu Phan appeals pro se from the dismissal of his lawsuit against 

Defendants Elizabeth Beebe Volz, a state court judge in Arapahoe County, Colorado, 

and Daniel T. Jacobs, whom Judge Volz appointed as guardian ad litem to protect 

Mr. Phan’s interests in state-court lawsuits he filed in 2018. The district court 

dismissed Mr. Phan’s claims based on judicial immunity, and we affirm.

* After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined 

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of 

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore 

ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding 

precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral 

estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with 

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

February 2, 2022

Christopher M. Wolpert

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 21-1199 Document: 010110640336 Date Filed: 02/02/2022 Page: 1
2

We review determinations of absolute immunity de novo.” Perez v. Ellington, 

421 F.3d 1128, 1133 (10th Cir. 2005). Although we review a pro se litigant’s 

pleadings liberally, we will not “take on the responsibility of serving as the litigant’s 

attorney in constructing arguments and searching the record.” Garrett v. Selby 

Connor Maddux & Janer, 425 F.3d 836, 841 (10th Cir. 2005).

A judge acting in her judicial capacity is absolutely immune from civil rights 

claims “unless the judge acts clearly without any colorable claim of jurisdiction.” 

Snell v. Tunnell, 920 F.2d 673, 686 (10th Cir. 1990). The district court held Judge 

Volz was entitled to absolute immunity, and Mr. Phan has not meaningfully 

challenged that holding on appeal. See Garrett, 425 F.3d at 841 (“Under [Fed. R. 

App. P.] 28, which applies equally to pro se litigants, a brief must contain more than 

a generalized assertion of error, with citations to supporting authority.”).

The courts have extended absolute immunity to other officials, including 

guardians ad litem, “who perform functions closely associated with the judicial 

process.” Dahl v. Charles F. Dahl, M.D., P.C. Defined Ben. Pension Tr., 744 F.3d 

623, 630 (10th Cir. 2014) (internal quotation marks omitted). This defense is called 

“quasi-judicial immunity” when applied to non-judges. Id. The district court held 

that quasi-judicial immunity protected Mr. Jacobs from Mr. Phan’s lawsuit, and 

Mr. Phan again has not argued otherwise on appeal.

We conclude that the district court correctly dismissed Mr. Phan’s lawsuit on 

these grounds. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of Mr. Phan’s claims against 

Judge Volz and Mr. Jacobs. We deny Mr. Phan’s motion for leave to proceed in 

Appellate Case: 21-1199 Document: 010110640336 Date Filed: 02/02/2022 Page: 2
3

forma pauperis. See Lister v. Dep’t of Treasury, 408 F.3d 1309, 1312 (10th Cir. 

2005) (on a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, the movant must show not only an 

inability to pay, but also “the existence of a reasoned, nonfrivolous argument on the 

law and facts”). Mr. Phan’s pending motion to dismiss this appeal is deficient and he 

has not corrected the deficiency as requested by the Court. The motion is therefore 

denied.

Entered for the Court

Nancy L. Moritz

Circuit Judge

Appellate Case: 21-1199 Document: 010110640336 Date Filed: 02/02/2022 Page: 3