NORIEGA
v.
FARR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Defendants Judge Scott Farr and Attorney General Ashley Moody are entitled to absolute immunity and are dismissed with prejudice.
Plaintiffs filed a pro se complaint against state court judge Scott Farr, Attorney General Ashley Moody, and others, alleging grievances arising from …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Prosecutorial Immunity cases and more on FLexlaw
This matter is before the Court sua sponte on Noriega's pro se complaint. (Doc. 1). The Court dismissed the case for failing to prove timely service, but the case was reopened. (Doc. 9). After reviewing the complaint, the Court finds that two defendants in this action are entitled to absolute immunity.
Plaintiff filed this suit against state court judge Scott Farr, Attorney General Ashley Moody, [fn 1] and several other defendants. The complaint is short and difficult to decipher, without setting forth any causes of action and factual allegations. [fn 2] But Plaintiff had at least one prior case before Judge Scott Farr in state court, so he therefore appears to be listed as a defendant because of grievances arising from that case. And Attorney General Moody's inclusion is likely due at least tangentially to her role as the chief law enforcement officer of the state of Florida.
Absolute Immunity as to Judge Farr and Attorney General Moody
Judges are entitled to judicial immunity from all acts taken in their judicial capacity. See, e.g., McCree v. Griffin, No. 19-14646-A, 2020 WL 2632329 (11th Cir. May 20, 2020); McCullough v. Finley, 907 F. 3d 1324, 1331 (11th Cir. 2018); Alba v. Montford, 517 F. 3d 1249, 1252 (11th Cir. 2018). The scope of judicial immunity is to be construed broadly, and applies even when the judge acts in error, maliciously, or in excess of his or her jurisdiction. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 356 (1978). A judge is only subject to liability in the clear absence of all jurisdiction. Id. at 356-57.
Here, because Judge Scott Farr is ostensibly being sued for his official acts in a previous case, he is absolutely immune from this suit. There are no allegations that he was acting in the “clear absence of all jurisdiction.” See id.
Prosecutors are also entitled to absolutely immunity for “acts undertaken ... in preparing for the initiation of judicial proceedings or for trial, and which occur in the course of his role as an advocate for the State.” Mastroianni v. Bowers, 173 F. 3d 1363 at 1366 (11th Cir. 1999) (quoting Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259, 273 (1993)). This doctrine does not protect prosecutors from acts that are “not associated with [their] role as an advocate for the state.” Id. (quoting Buckley, 509 U.S. at 276-78).
Attorney General Moody is shielded from liability. She is entitled to absolute immunity absent any allegations of acts that occurred outside her "role as an advocate for the state." Id. In sum, both Judge Farr and Attorney General Moody are absolutely immune from this lawsuit and must be dismissed with prejudice.
Amendment
A pro se plaintiff "must be given at least one chance to amend the complaint before the district court dismisses the action with prejudice," unless amendment would be futile. See McCree, 2020 WL 2632329, at *1 (quoting Bank v. Pitt, 928 F. 2d 1108, 1112 (11th Cir. 1991)). Due to absolute immunity, any claims against Judge Farr and Attorney General Moody based on their conduct in legal proceedings involving Plaintiffs are futile.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
1. Defendants Scott Farr and Ashley Moody are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE from this action.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 13th day of September, 2024.
Jhp.Bl 4
TOM BARBER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE*
*Signed by Judge Thomas P. Barber to expedite the resolution of this motion. This case remains assigned to Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle.
[fn 1]: The complaint lists "Ashley Mooney, State Attorney," and the Court assumes this to mean Ashley Moody, Attorney General of the state of Florida. (Doc. 1)
[fn 2]: The allegations in the complaint consist of the following, without further explanation or any request for relief: "Paper for Lawn equipment/Police beat me up/false imprisonment and Lost of Business." Id.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Noriega v. Farr (M.D. Fla. 2024)…f law enforcement officer of the state of Florida. Absolute Immunity as to Judge Farr and Attorney General Moody Judges are entitled to judicial immunity from all acts taken in their judicial capacity. See, e.g., McCree v. Griffin, No. 19-14646-A, 2020 WL 2632329 (11th Cir. May 20, 2020); McCullough v. Finley, 907 F.3d 1324, 1331 (11th Cir. 2018); Alba v. Montford, 517 F.3d 1249, 1252 (11th Cir. 2018). The scope of judicial immunity is to be construed broadly, and applies even when the judge acts in error, m…1 / 2
-
Cuyler v. State (M.D. Fla. 2025)…vailable. Id. at 1242. "A judge enjoys immunity for judicial acts regardless of whether he made a mistake, acted maliciously, or exceeded his authority." McCullough v. Finley, 907 F.3d 1324, 1331 (11th Cir. 2018). McCree v. Griffin, No. 19-14646-A, 2020 WL 2632329, at *1 (11th Cir. May 20, 2020). Importantly, “judicial immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from ultimate assessment of damages.” Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991) (citing Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985)). Considering the…1 / 2
-
Shaefer v. Fritton (M.D. Fla. 2025)…lable. Id. at 1242. "A judge enjoys immunity for judicial acts regardless of whether he made a mistake, acted maliciously, or exceeded his authority." McCullough v. Finley, 907 F. 3d 1324, 1331 (11th Cir. 2018). McCree v. Griffin, No. 19-14646-A, 2020 WL 2632329, at *1 (11th Cir. May 20, 2020). Importantly, “judicial immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from ultimate assessment of damages.” Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991) (citing Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985)). Considering t…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Stump v. Sparkman et vir, 435 U.S. 349 (U.S. 1978)
- Alba v. Montford, 517 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir. 2008)
- Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259 (U.S. 1993)
- McCullough v. Finley, 907 F.3d 1324 (11th Cir. 2018)
- Mastroianni v. Bowers, 173 F.3d 1363 (11th Cir. 1999)
- Noriega v. Farr (M.D. Fla. 2024)