2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 6-3-2005 

# B eddini v . D i lt s P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-4151

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " Be dd ini v . Di lts " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1069. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/1069CP S - 1 7 7 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N O . 04- 4151

________________ JANET B EDDI

NI v. TH OMAS H . D IL TS, P.J.S. C. Jan B e ddini , Appellant

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l Fro m the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

Fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey ( D . C . C i v. N o. 04- cv- 03526) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e St anl eyR . C hes l er

_______________________________________ S u b mi t t e d F o rP o s s i b l e Di s mi s s a l Un d e r2 8 U. S . C. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B) M ar ch 24, 2005 BEFORE: ALI TO, M c KEE an d AM BRO , CI RCU I T J UD GES

( Fi l ed J une 3, 2005)

_______________________ OP I NI ON

_______________________ P E R C UR I AM Ja n e t B e d d in i ap p e a ls th e D istric t C o u rt’s o rd e r g ra n tin g a p p e llee ’s m o tio n to2

d ism iss . W e c o n c lu d e th a t th e D istric t C o u rt’s d e c isio n w a s p ro p e r, an d , the re f o re , w ill d is m is s th is a p p e a l p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 (e ). I n J ul y2004 B eddi ni fi l ed a c om pl ai ntpur s uantt o 42 U . S. C . §§ 1983, 1985 & 1986. She al l eged thatH onor abl e Thom as H . D i l t s , Pr es i di ng J udge, Super i orC our tof Som er s etC ount y , N ew J er s ey , vi ol at ed herFour t eenth A m endmentr i ght s w hen he rul ed on herm ot i ons i n herfami l yl aw cas e. J udge D i l t s fi l ed a mot i on t o di s m i s s the compl ai ntpur s uantt o Fed. R . C i v. P. 12( b) ( 1) , ( 2) and ( 6) , w hi ch w as gr ant ed bythe D i s t r i ctC our t . B eddi ni t i m el yappea l ed. W e have j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1291. W e maydi s m i s s thi s appea l pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1915( e) ( 2) ( B ) i f i thas no ar guabl e bas i s i n l aw orfac t . N ei t zke v . W illia m s , 4 9 0 U .S . 3 1 9 , 3 2 5 (1 9 8 9 ). T h e D istric t C o u rt g ra n ted th e m o tio n to d ism iss a n d c o n c lu d e d th a t Ju d g e D ilt s w a s a b so lu telyim m u n e f ro m su it. W e a g re e . Ju d g e D ilt s a c ted in h is ju d icia l ca p a c ity w h e n ru lin g o n th e m o tio n s a t is s u e . S e e M ir e le s v . W a c o , 5 0 2 U .S . 9 , 1 1 (1 9 9 1 ). B eddi ni ’ s cl ai m t hatJ udge D i l t s cons pi r ed w i t h other s oract ed mal i ci ous l ydoes notal t er t he appl i cat i on of j udi ci al i m m uni t yt o t hi s cas e. See Pi er s on v. R ay , 386 U . S. 547, 554 (1 9 6 7 ); s e e , e .g ., D e n n is v . S p a rk s , 4 4 9 U .S . 2 4 , 2 6 -2 7 (1 9 8 0 ). F o r th e f o re g o in g re a so n s, w e w ill d ism iss B e d d in i’s a p p e a l p u rsu a n t to § 1 9 1 5 (e)(2).