# James Brown v. Edward Griesenauer, Jerry Davis, David London, Kenneth Molloy, Karl Duncan, Theodore Boller, Marvin Coval

> Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · July 13, 1992 · 970 F.2d 431

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9483181

## Case

- **Full name:** James BROWN, Appellee, v. Edward GRIESENAUER, Jerry Davis, David London, Kenneth Molloy, Karl Duncan, Theodore Boller, Marvin Coval, Appellants
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
- **Decided:** July 13, 1992
- **Citations:** 970 F.2d 431; 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 15939; 1992 WL 158559
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Beam
- **Judges:** McMillian, Beam, Rosenbaum
- **Cited by:** 61 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9483181

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that “[although state law entrusts the board of aldermen with the authority to impeach the mayor, we do not think that impeachment is a truly legislative act; it is instead an act that happens to have been done by legislators”
- holding that impeachment proceedings are essentially judicial or adjudi catory in nature despite legislative decision-making body and form of proceedings
- holding that impeachment proceedings are essentially judicial or adjudicatory in nature despite legislative decision-making body and form of proceedings
- finding alderman absolutely immune from civil liability for having impeached a mayor for misconduct

## Opinion text

BEAM, Circuit Judge,
concurring and concurring specially.
I agree with Judge McMillian’s thorough and scholarly analysis of absolute immunity and concur in his opinion. I think, additionally, that Brown’s complaint suffers from a more fundamental defect. He simply does not state a claim for relief that can be granted under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . I recognize that it is frequently more expeditious to reach the question of immunity than to analyze the quality of the claim asserted. Perhaps this is such a case. Here, however, the path followed clearly demonstrates that more due process was given Brown under Missouri law than was required by the Constitution.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9483181. Public record. Not legal advice.