How cited: Harvey Smith v. Walter Rosenbaum · Go Syfert

Harvey Smith v. Walter Rosenbaum (1972)

green · 25 citation events across 15 courts. Showing the 11 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
197520002026
Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.
See Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 427 , 96 S.Ct. 984 , 47 L.Ed.2d 128 (1976) (prosecutor); Smith v. Rosenbaum, 460 F.2d 1019, 1020 (3d Cir.1972).
Rule Authority · 5th Cir.
Slotnik v. Staviskey, 560 F.2d 31, 32 (1st Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1077 , 98 S.Ct. 1268 , 55 L.Ed.2d 783 (1978) (in entering judgment); Lockhart v. Hoenstine, 411 F.2d 455, 460 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 941 , 90 S.Ct. 378 , 24 L.Ed.2d 244 (1969) (under court order); Brown v. Dunne, 409 F.2d 341, 343 (7th Cir. 1969) (in administering conservatorship); see Barnes v. Dorsey, 480 F.2d 1057, 1060 (8th Cir. 1973) (in denying transcript under procedural rules); S…
in revoking bail bond under statutory requirement
Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.
The following cases indicate the range of reasoning used by the courts to protect the clerk of the court from liability in civil rights suits: Denman v. Leedy, 479 F.2d 1097, 1098 (6th Cir. 1973) (failure to fix bond was within scope of official, quasi-judicial duties); Blouin v. Dembitz, 367 F.Supp. 415, 422 (S.D.N.Y.1973), aff’d solely on other grounds, 489 F.2d 488 (2d Cir. 1973) (issuance of arrest warrants by judge for failure to respond to summons is a judicial act for…
revocation of bail bond was a ministerial act mandated by statute
green Harmon v. Lawson (2022)
Rule Authority · D. Del.
Immunity from suit applies when: [t]he official’s action in question involves the exercise of discretionary judgment, Antoine v. Byers & Anderson, Inc., 508 U.S. 429, 435 [-]36 (1993), performance of a function under the direction of a judge, Waits v. McGowan, 516 F.2d 203, 205-06 (3d Cir. 1975), performance of a ministerial duty pursuant to a statute, see Smith v. Rosenbaum, 460 F.2d 1019, 1020 (3d Cir. 1972), or performance of a function otherwise closely allied with the j…
Rule Authority · D.N.J.
Credit Union, 197 F. App’x 102, 106 (3d Cir. 2006); Smith v. Rosenbaum, 460 F.2d 1019, 1020 (3d Cir. 1972).
Rule Authority · D. Kan.
“Immunity which derives from judicial immunity may extend to persons other than a judge where performance of judicial acts or activity as an official aid of the judge is involved.” Henriksen v. Bentley, 644 F.2d 852, 855 (10th Cir. 1981). “[A]bsolute judicial immunity has been extended to non-judicial officers where ‘their duties had an integral relationship with the judicial process.’” Whitesel v. Sengenberger, 222 F.3d 861, 867 (10th Cir. 2000) (quoting Eades v. Sterlinske…
holding that a clerk setting bail enjoyed judicial immunity
green Stanton v. Chase (1985)
Rule Authority · D.C.
See, e.g., Slotnick v. Garfinkle, 632 F.2d 163, 166 (1st Cir.1980) (judicial immunity extended to court clerk in filling out commitment papers because carrying out official directives of judge); Smith v. Rosenbaum, 460 F.2d 1019, 1020 (3d Cir.1972) (court clerk has immunity for performance of ministerial acts mandated by statute); Haldane v. Chagnon, 345 F.2d 601, 604 (9th Cir.1965) (bailiff, acting at direction of judge, is part of “the body of the court” and “is entitled t…
Rule Authority · E.D. Pa.
See Robinson v. McCorkle, 462 F.2d 111, 113 (3d Cir.) (alternative holding), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1042 , 93 S.Ct. 529 , 34 L.Ed.2d 492 (1972); Smith v. Rosenbaum, 460 F.2d 1019, 1020 (3d Cir. 1972) (per curiam) (alternative holding); Marcedes v. Barrett, 453 F.2d 391, 392 (3d Cir. 1971) (per curiam) (alternative holding); Henig v. Odorioso, 385 F.2d 491, 494 (3d Cir. 1967).
per curiam
green Guarino v. Larsen (1993)
Cited · E.D. Pa. · signal: see
See Smith v. Rosenbaum, 460 F.2d 1019 (3rd Cir.1972).
green Bailey v. Kenney (1992)
Cited · D. Kan. · signal: accord
Co., 299 F.Supp. 429, 435 (D.Minn.1969) (in § 1983 case, “[s]o long as the bounds of reasonable means needed to effect the apprehension are not transgressed, and the purpose of the recapture is proper in light of the surety’s undertaking, sureties will not be liable for returning their principals to proper custody.”); accord Smith v. Rosenbaum, 333 F.Supp. 35, 39 (E.D.Pa.1971), aff'd, 460 F.2d 1019 (3d Cir.1972); Thomas v. Miller, 282 F.Supp. 571, 573 (E.D.Tenn.1968). 8 For …
Cited · D. Del. · signal: see
See Smith v. Rosenbaum, 460 F.2d 1019 (3d Cir.1972); accord Scott v. Dixon, 720 F.2d 1542 (11th Cir.1983), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 105 S.Ct. 122 , 83 L.Ed.2d 64 (1984).