00-2173 Richman v. Sheahan

Listen to this article

“The policies articulated in our quasi- judicial immunity cases have less force when, as in this case, the challenged conduct is the manner in which the judge’s order is carried out, and not conduct specifically directed by a judge. Reading Richman’s complaint in the light most favorable to her, the claim is not that the judge ordered the deputies to use unreasonable force, but that the deputies exceeded the judge’s order by the manner in which they executed it. The claim for damages in this case is not therefore a collateral attack on the judge’s order (an order that Richman concedes was valid), and an appeal of the judge’s order would provide no remedy. Similarly, the deputies are not being called upon to answer for wrongdoing directed by the judge, but instead for their own conduct. And that conduct – the manner in which they enforced the judge’s order – implicates an executive, not judicial, function.

“Richman alleges that the deputies’ conduct was willful and wanton, but there is nothing in the complaint that would indicate that the deputies’ conduct was motivated by a purpose other than executing the judge’s order. We therefore conclude that the deputies’ actions were within the scope of their authority for purposes of Illinois sovereign immunity.”

Affirmed in part and Reversed in part.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Gottschall, J., Williams, J.