Jessen v. Town of Eastchester, 114 F.3d 7 (2d Cir. 1997). · Go Syfert
Jessen v. Town of Eastchester, 114 F.3d 7 (2d Cir. 1997). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
20 citation events (18 in the last 25 years) across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: (PC) Hearns v. Whisnand (caed, 2020-10-30)
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) (PC) Hearns v. Whisnand
E.D. Cal. · 2020 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
a non-lawyer 'has no authority to appear as an attorney for others than 8 himself,
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition v. Rowland
2d Cir. · 2007 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
even if no such vacancies in the full-time workforce exist, the district court can order unreinstated workers to be hired as durational employees until openings arise
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Almonte v. City of Long Beach
2d Cir. · 2007 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
even assuming, without deciding, that the elimination of jessen's position was a legislative act, his earlier termination from a position which then, at least briefly, remained open was an administrative act that legislative immunity does not protect.
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Almonte v. City Of Long Beach
2d Cir. · 2007 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
even assuming, without deciding, that the elimination of jessen's position was a legislative act, his earlier termination from a position which then, at least briefly, remained open was an administrative act that legislative immunity does not protect.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Davidson v. Washington Corrections Center for Women
W.D. Wash. · 2020 · confidence medium
Forsyth, 114 F.3d 7 at 1474.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Hicks v. Pastor
W.D. Wash. · 2019 · confidence medium
Forsyth, 114 F.3d 7 at 1474.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Bloomingburg Jewish Education Center v. Village of Bloomingburg
S.D.N.Y. · 2015 · confidence medium
See, e.g., id. at 83-84 (legislative immunity does not apply to enforcement activities); Harhay v. Town of Ellington Bd. of Educ., 323 F.3d 206 , 211 (2d Cir. 2003) (public officials not entitled to legislative immunity that were “administrative, not legislative, in nature” in that they did not implicate “the kind of broad, prospective policymaking that is characteristic of legislative action”); Jessen v. Town of Eastchester, 114 F.3d 7, 8 (2d Cir.1997) (per curiam) (challenged determination “was an administrative act that legislative immunity does not protect”).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Olma v. Collins
2d Cir. · 2012 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. Jessen v. Town of Eastchester, 114 F.3d 7, 8 (2d Cir.1997) (upholding district court’s denial of motion to dismiss based on legislative immunity “[b]ecause the complaint allege[d] that defendants fired Jessen before eliminating his position through any legislative action”).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Harhay v. Blanchette
D. Conn. · 2001 · confidence medium
In Jessen v. Town of Eastchester, 114 F.3d 7, 8 (2d Cir.1997), the Second Circuit was presented with the question of whether the elimination of a single position by a town board "was a legislative act for which [the board members] are entitled to absolute immunity from suit.” However, the court declined to reach that question. 7 .
cited Cited "see" (HC) Parrales-Mero v. Warden at FCI Mendota
E.D. Cal. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
See Porter v. 6 | Adams, 244 F.3d 1006, 1006-07 (9th Cir. 2001) (citing Forde v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 114 F.3d 7 | 878, 879 (9th Cir. 1997)). 8 Accordingly, 9 1.
discussed Cited "see" (PC) Hodges v. Warden of Folsom State Prison
E.D. Cal. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
See Johns v. County of San Diego, 114 F.3d 7 || 874, 876-877 (9th Cir. 1997) (a non-lawyer has no authority to appear as an attorney for another, 8 | and general power of attorney does not give non-lawyer right to assert the personal constitutional 9 | claims of another). 10 Further, Rule 11 also provides that “[t]he court must strike an unsigned paper unless the 11 || omission is promptly corrected after being called to the . . . party’s attention.” Fed.
cited Cited "see" Highview Properties D.H.F. Inc. v. Town of Monroe
S.D.N.Y. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See Jessen v. Town of Eastchester, 114 F.3d 7 (2d Cir. 1997); State Emples.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." NRP Holdings LLC v. City of Buffalo
2d Cir. · 2019 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Rowland , 494 F.3d at 91-92 ; Almonte v. City of Long Beach , 478 F.3d 100 , 108 (2d Cir. 2007) ; Harhay v. Town of Ellington Bd. of Educ. , 323 F.3d 206 , 210-11 (2d Cir. 2003) ; Camacho v. Brandon , 317 F.3d 153 , 164-65 (2d Cir. 2003) ; see also Jessen v. Town of Eastchester , 114 F.3d 7 , 8-9 (2d Cir. 1997) (per curiam) (pre- Bogan decision assessing immunity for state legislators in connection with a public-employment dispute).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." NRP Holdings LLC v. City of Buffalo
2d Cir. · 2019 · signal: see also · confidence low
The Planning See Rowland, 494 F.3d at 91‐92; Almonte v. City of Long Beach, 478 F.3d 100, 108 (2d Cir. 2007); 11 Harhay v. Town of Ellington Bd. of Educ., 323 F.3d 206 , 210–11 (2d Cir. 2003); Camacho v. Brandon, 317 F.3d 153 , 164‐65 (2d Cir. 2003); see also Jessen v. Town of Eastchester, 114 F.3d 7 , 8–9 (2d Cir. 1997) (per curiam) (pre‐Bogan decision assessing immunity for state legislators in connection with a public‐employment dispute).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Preben Jessen
v.
Town of Eastchester, Jim Cavanaugh, Individually, Thomas F. Doherty, Jr., Individually, Vicki C. Ford, Individually, Gary C. Delvecchio, Individually
1503.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
May 16, 1997.
114 F.3d 7
1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 11401
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published

114 F.3d 7

Preben JESSEN, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
TOWN OF EASTCHESTER, Defendant,
Jim Cavanaugh, individually, Thomas F. Doherty, Jr.,
individually, Vicki C. Ford, individually, Gary C.
Delvecchio, individually, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 1503, Docket 96-9509.

United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit.

Argued May 8, 1997.
Decided May 16, 1997.

John M. Flannery, White Plains (Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, White Plains, of counsel), for Defendants-Appellants.

Craig T. Dickinson, White Plains (Lovett & Gould, White Plains, of counsel), for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Before: FEINBERG, CARDAMONE, and LEVAL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

[*~7]1

Defendants appeal from an order of the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Barrington D. Parker, Jr., Judge, denying their motion seeking to dismiss the complaint by reason of absolute legislative immunity.

2

Jessen brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the defendants, who are Republican members of the Eastchester Town Board, fired him and terminated his position in retaliation for his constitutionally protected political activities. The complaint alleges, in substance, the following.

3

In 1981 the Town of Eastchester (the "Town") enacted Local Law 2, which established the Department of Lake Isle Operations (the "Department") to manage Lake Isle, a country club owned by the Town. Local Law 2 created the positions of Director and Deputy Director of the Department and provided that the Town Board would have the power to fill them.

4

In 1984, the Town Board appointed Jessen Director of the Department on the motion of James P. Doody, a Democrat who was then Town Supervisor. After his position was reclassified as a competitive civil service position with the title of Park Superintendent for Lake Isle, Jessen acquired tenure on May 17, 1988. As a result of Jessen's status as a "veteran" under the New York Civil Service Law, he also obtained a property interest in his position.

5

Since 1983, the Town Board has licensed the Lake Isle catering operations to Carf Caterers, Inc. ("Carf"). In 1995, the defendants conspired with Carf, a political ally, to eliminate Jessen's position because Jessen had been outspoken in criticizing Carf and supporting Doody, their Democratic adversary. Before March 1, 1996, defendants met secretly and agreed to discharge Jessen, eliminate his position, and to do so in a manner that would minimize public opposition and "maximize the emotional impact" upon Jessen. On March 1, 1996, defendant Cavanaugh told Jessen that he was "fired" and ordered him to remove his belongings and leave his office "immediately." On March 5, 1996, defendants caused the Town Board to pass a motion abolishing Jessen's position. Shortly thereafter, the Town Board contracted with Carf to manage Lake Isle.

6

Claiming entitlement to absolute legislative immunity, defendants moved to dismiss the complaint. The district court denied the motion. Defendants appealed.

[*8]7

On appeal, defendants argue that the elimination of Jessen's position was a legislative act for which they are entitled to absolute immunity from suit. We need not, and expressly do not, address the merits of this contention. The complaint alleges that four days before the Town Board passed the motion abolishing Jessen's position, Cavanaugh, acting pursuant to a conspiracy with the other defendants, told Jessen that he was fired and ordered him to leave his office. The injury inflicted on Jessen by the firing thus preceded the Town Board's vote to eliminate his position. Even assuming, without deciding, that the elimination of Jessen's position was a legislative act, his earlier termination from a position which then, at least briefly, remained open was an administrative act that legislative immunity does not protect. See Forrester v. White, 484 U.S. 219, 229, 108 S.Ct. 538, 545, 98 L.Ed.2d 555 (1988).

8

Because the complaint alleges that defendants fired Jessen before eliminating his position through any legislative action, the district court properly denied their motion to dismiss. We therefore affirm its ruling. We express no view on whether the alleged acts in fact occurred, whether they gave rise to any liability, whether the subsequent elimination of Jessen's position by the Town Board was shielded by legislative immunity, or whether such subsequent legislative elimination limits any damages Jessen may recover by reason of the earlier firing.