Gower v. Clifford

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania · June 13, 2025 · No. 2:25-cv-02262

Summary

This memorandum opinion from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania addresses a pro se plaintiff’s civil rights complaint against a state judge and a county. The court grants the plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis but dismisses the complaint for failure to state a claim. The court holds that the judge is protected by absolute judicial immunity, the county shares Eleventh Amendment immunity as part of the state judicial system, and any attempt to review state court proceedings is barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Leave to amend is denied as futile.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Writing for the Court
Juan R. Sánchez
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Decision date
June 13, 2025
Docket number
2:25-cv-02262
Procedural posture
Court granted in forma pauperis status and dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
Standard of review
Standard for motions to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) as applied to in forma pauperis complaints.
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

motions to dismisscivil proceduresection 1983civil rights

Practice areas

civil procedurecivil rights

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the complaint states a claim sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
  2. Whether judicial immunity bars liability against Judge Daniel Clifford for alleged constitutional violations.
  3. Whether Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity bars liability against Montgomery County for alleged constitutional violations.
  4. Whether the Rooker‑Feldman doctrine bars federal review of state‑court custody judgments.

Holdings

  1. The complaint fails to allege any factual matter sufficient to state a plausible claim and is dismissed for failure to state a claim.
  2. Judge Clifford is absolutely immune from suit for actions taken in his judicial capacity; the claim is barred.
  3. Montgomery County is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment; the claim is dismissed.
  4. The doctrine bars the plaintiff’s attempt to obtain federal review of the state‑court custody decision; the claim is dismissed.

Key quotations

A judicial officer in the performance of his duties has absolute immunity from suit and will not be liable for his judicial acts. (at 184)
A judge will not be deprived of immunity because the action he took was in error, was done maliciously, or was in excess of his authority. (at 241)

Factual background

Plaintiff Travis Gower, pro se, filed a complaint alleging a Fifth Amendment due‑process violation and other constitutional harms, but provided no factual allegations and attached documents relating to a Pennsylvania child‑custody matter. He named Judge Daniel Clifford and Montgomery County as defendants.

Procedural history

Pro se plaintiff Travis Gower filed a complaint alleging constitutional violations against Judge Daniel Clifford and Montgomery County without factual allegations; the district court considered the pleading under Rule 8 and Rule 12(b)(6) standards and entered dismissal.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…