Opinions of the United
2004 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
9-14-2004
O'Callaghan v. Farmer
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 03-4259
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2004
Recommended Citation
"O'Callaghan v. Farmer" (2004). 2004 Decisions. Paper 338.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2004/338
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2004 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 03-4259
____________________
D.T.B., a minor child, by his next friend,
Daniel J. O’Callaghan; DANIEL J. O’CALLAGHAN,
Appellants
v.
JOHN J. FARMER, Hon., in his past or present official capacity
as Attorney General of the State of New Jersey; JOHN J. HARPER,
Hon., in his past or present capacity as Justice of the Superior
Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part; DAVID F.
SALVAGGIO; MATHIAS R. HAGOVSKY; ANN T. SCUCCI
____________________
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
(No. 01-cv-00630)
Hon. Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr.
____________________
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
June 16, 2004
Before: ALITO and SMITH, Circuit Judges, and DUBOIS, District Judge*
(Opinion Filed: September 14, 2004)
*
Hon. Jan E. DuBois, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania, sitting by designation.
___________________
OPINION OF THE COURT
___________________
PER CURIAM:
This appeal stems from litigation in the New Jersey Superior Court, Family Part.
Plaintiff Daniel J. O’Callaghan filed a paternity, custody, and/or visitation action against
V.R.B., the mother of O’Callaghan’s minor son. Defendant Judge Harper presided over
this case and terminated O’Callaghan’s overnight visitation rights. After O’Callaghan
failed to obtain interlocutory relief in the Appellate Division and the New Jersey Supreme
Court, he filed a complaint against Judge Harper with the State Advisory Committee on
Judicial Conduct, but this also proved unsuccessful. Judge Harper eventually dismissed
O’Callaghan’s complaint and imposed sanctions for procedural violations. O’Callaghan
then made additional efforts to obtain appellate review in the New Jersey courts.
Greatly dissatisfied with the state court litigation, O’Callaghan subsequently filed
this action in federal court asserting numerous federal constitutional and statutory claims
against the judge, the former state attorney general, a court appointed psychologist, and
others. The District Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims against the judge and former
attorney general pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and issued a detailed opinion
explaining the basis of its decision. For essentially the reasons stated in that opinion, we
hold that these claims were properly dismissed. We appreciate the importance of
-2-
O’Callaghan’s concerns, but the claims asserted in the present federal action are
inextricably intertwined with the state court decisions, and the lower federal courts
accordingly lack jurisdiction to entertain those claims.
The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the court-appointed
psychologist, holding that she was entitled to absolute immunity under Hughes v. Long,
242 F.3d 121 (3d Cir. 2001). We agree with this ruling.
We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced by the appellant but
see no ground for reversing the District Court’s disposition of any of the claims asserted
against any of the defendants. Accordingly, the orders from which the appeal were taken
are affirmed.
-3-