Benton C. Sullens v. Bryant S. Carroll, Jr., 446 F.2d 1392 (5th Cir. 1971). · Go Syfert
Search
Benton C. Sullens v. Bryant S. Carroll, Jr., 446 F.2d 1392 (5th Cir. 1971). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
12 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Marcus Rogozinski v. Karla R. Spaulding (ca11, 2009-05-08) · Strongest negative: Gardner v. Luckey (ca5, 1974-12-10)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" Gardner v. Luckey
5th Cir. · 1974 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see John v. Hurt, 489 F.2d 786 (CA7, 1973) (it is at least arguable that the public defender acts under color of law, but he enjoys qualified immunity against damage suits) Appellees argue that this circuit has endorsed the no state action theory in Sullens v. Carroll, 446 F.2d 1392 (CA5, 1971), and O'Brien v. Colbath, 465 F.2d 358 (CA5, 1972).
discussed Cited "see" Marcus Rogozinski v. Karla R. Spaulding
11th Cir. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sullens v. Carroll, 446 F.2d 1392 , 1392-93 (5th Cir.1971) (per curiam) (holding court-appointed lawyers were immune from malpractice suits); O’Brien v. Colbath, 465 F.2d 358, 359 (5th Cir.1972) (per curiam) (extending Sullens to civil rights actions against public defenders in federal prosecutions).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Ferri v. Rossetti (2×)
Pa. · 1979 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Sullens v. Carroll, 446 F.2d 1392 (5th Cir. 1971); Jones v. Warlick, 364 F.2d 828 (4th Cir. 1966) (absolute immunity of federally appointed criminal defense attorneys).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Benton C. SULLENS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Bryant S. CARROLL, Jr., Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
71-1133.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Jul 13, 1971.
446 F.2d 1392
Benton C. Sullens, pro se., Marion R. Shepard, Mathews, Osborne & Ehrlich, Jacksonville, Fla., for defendants-appellees.
Thornberry, Morgan, Clark.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

Benton C. Sullens has appealed from the district court’s grant of a summary judgment to members of a law firm whom he sued for malpractice. The cause of action was based on Attorney Bryant S. Carroll, Jr.’s representation of the appellant as his court-appointed counsel in a federal criminal case. See Sullens v. United States, 5th Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 545.

Federal jurisdiction was predicated on diversity of citizenship, the district court having held previously that there was no jurisdiction of the cause under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Sullens v. Carroll, M.D.Fla.1970, 308 F.Supp. 311.

The court below awarded summary judgment on grounds that court-appointed counsel for defendants in federal criminal cases are immune from suit the same as federal officials are." The Fourth Circuit so held in Jones v. Warlick, 4th Cir. 1966, 364 F.2d 828, for reasons more fully stated in the comprehensive unpublished opinion of Circuit Judge J. Spencer Bell, sitting by designation. We have examined the authorities cited in those opinions, including our own decision in Norton v. McShane, 5th[*1393] Cir. 1964, 332 F.2d 855, cert. denied 1965, 380 U.S. 981, 85 S.Ct. 1345, 14 L.Ed.2d 274 and we agree that the immunity doctrine is applicable. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court from which this appeal is taken.

Affirmed.