Legal Opinion
Anderson v. Boyd
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided August 30, 1983No. 82-3315PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FARRIS, Circuit Judge:
The district court dismissed the Andersons’ section 1983 action on the ground that the defendant parole officials were absolutely immune from civil liability. The Andersons appeal. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
FACTS
On May 23, 1979, James and Darline Anderson, husband and wife, filed a pro se complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking damages and other relief against William Cogswell, Chairman of the Oregon State *908Parole Board, and Jerald Boyd, Assistant Director of the Oregon Interstate Compact. The complaint alleged that the defendants were harassing the husband,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Butz v. EconomouSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- John Houston Sellars v. Raymond K. ProcunierCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Donald Montero v. Brion Travis, Commissioner Kenneth Graber, CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- Taggart v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1992
- Clarence C. Trotter v. Paul J. Klincar, Individually and as Acting Chairman of the Prison Review BoardCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
- Michael T. Swift v. State of California Department of Corrections Keith Tandy, and Steve Christian Maritza RodriguezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- In Re Scott County Master DocketDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1987
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.