D. Bart Rockett v. The Honorable Eric Eighmy, No. 21-3903 (8th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
Plaintiff sued a Missouri judge for putting his kids in jail twice, once after a custody hearing and again after ordering law enforcement to pick them up in Louisiana. The complaint alleged that Defendant’s action of placing Plaintiff’s children in jail and then later in a juvenile-detention facility violated their First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Defendant argued that he should receive absolute immunity, but the district court disagreed and ruled that the case could proceed. At issue on appeal is whether judicial immunity shields these acts.
The Eighth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. The court explained that Defendant’s decision to personally escort the kids to jail took what would otherwise be a judicial act too far. Judges have the authority to order an officer or a bailiff to escort an unruly litigant to jail. The court wrote that Defendant crossed the line; however, when he personally escorted the kids to jail, stood there while they removed their clothes and belongings, and personally came back an hour later to release them. Further, the court explained that here, even if Defendant had no “express authority” to issue the pick-up order, he is immune because he had jurisdiction to issue one. He cannot be sued, in other words, no matter how erroneous his interpretation of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act may be.
Court Description: [Stras, Author, with Smith, Chief Judge, and Kobes, Circuit Judge] Civil case - Civil rights. The defendant Missouri state court judge crossed the limits of his authority when he personally escorted plaintiff's minor children to jail, stood there while they removed their clothes and personal belongings, and personally came back an hour later to release them; he was not entitled to judicial immunity for these acts as they were not a function normally performed by a judge; however, the judge had juridiction to issue a pick-up order after plaintiff and the children failed to appear in his court, and he cannot be sued for issuing the order.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.