Legal Opinion
Wickstrom v. Ebert
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Decided April 5, 1984No. 83-C-2017PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
WARREN, District Judge.
Presently before the Court are the several motions to dismiss filed by the ten named defendants in this case. Because the Court concludes, as stated herein, that the doctrines of judicial, prosecutorial, and witness immunity and the limitations on the scope of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 preclude the plaintiffs from maintaining the present action for alleged violations of their constitutional rights, the defendants’ motions to dismiss must be granted. In addition, the movants will be awarded their costs incurred in defending this action to date.
BACKGROUND
As the…
2Cases cited60 opinions
- Imbler v. PachtmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Stump v. SparkmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Pierson v. RaySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Butz v. EconomouSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bankr. L. Rep. P 71,526 Lonneker Farms, Inc. And Robert Lonneker v. John Klobucher, Allen Hatley, Allen Hatley and Associates, DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Read v. Duck (In Re Jacksen)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Kowalski-Schmidt v. Forsch (In Re Giordano)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Bennett v. WilliamsDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1988
- Bausch v. SumiecDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2001
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.