Unpublished Disposition, 917 F.2d 27 (9th Cir. 1988)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Michael Henry Ferdik, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging denial of access to the courts. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

We review de novo the district court's grant of summary judgment. Darring v. Kincheloe, 783 F.2d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1986). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, we will affirm if there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Hernandez v. Johnston, 833 F.2d 1316, 1317-18 (9th Cir. 1987); Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).

On October 27, 1988, Ferdik attempted to file a state tort action in the Superior Court of Maricopa County. Judith Allen, clerk of the Superior Court, returned Ferdik's complaint without filing it for failure to pay the $50.00 filing fee. At that time, Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) Sec. 12-306(L) (2) precluded waiver of filing fees for certain actions filed by incarcerated felons. On December 28, 1988, Ferdik filed this section 1983 action alleging denial of access to the courts. Ferdik requested injunctive relief permitting incarcerated felons to file actions in the Superior Court of Maricopa County without payment of filing fees, and sought compensatory damages in the amount of $50,000.00. In January of 1989, the county clerk's office implemented a new policy of "deferring" filing fees pursuant to A.R.S. Sec. 12-302 in actions filed by incarcerated felons.

Court clerks "have absolute quasi-judicial immunity from damages for civil rights violations when they perform tasks that are an integral part of the judicial process." Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court, 828 F.2d 1385, 1390 (9th Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1040 (1988). A mistake or an act in excess of jurisdiction does not abrogate such immunity even if it results in " 'grave procedural errors.' " Id. (quoting Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 359 (1978)).

Judith Allen, clerk of the Superior Court of Maricopa County, rejected Ferdik's complaint for filing without the required fee pursuant to A.R.S. Sec. 12-306(L) (2). Because the filing of complaints is an integral part of the judicial process performed by court clerks, Allen is entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity in this action. See Mullis, 828 F.2d at 1390. Therefore, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment against Ferdik.

AFFIRMED.