Sivak v. Martin-Olguin
- James Donato
- 3:25-cv-00562
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Sivak v. Martin-Olguin, Judge Donato dismissed the case with prejudice because the defendant was immune from damages claims over judicial actions.
Lacey Sivak’s damages claims against Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin were dismissed with prejudice; the order also closed the case and barred further filings in it.
What happened
In Sivak v. Martin-Olguin, Lacey Sivak, who is incarcerated in Idaho and represented himself, sued Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin. The opinion says Sivak has filed many cases in the district, including earlier suits against the judge.
The court said Judge Martinez-Olguin is immune from civil damages claims based on actions taken in her judicial role. It dismissed this case with prejudice, ordered it closed, and said no further filings would be accepted.
Judge Donato entered the order on May 13, 2025. The order also said Sivak may appeal the judge’s decisions to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit as circumstances warrant.
The detailed version
- Sivak v. Martin-Olguin · No. 3:25-cv-00562
- James Donato
- May 13, 2025
Background
Lacey Sivak, proceeding without a lawyer, sued Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin. The opinion states that Sivak is incarcerated in Idaho and has filed many cases in the Northern District of California. It also states that, after unfavorable court decisions, Sivak frequently sues the presiding judge. The court referred to several earlier cases involving Sivak and Judge Martinez-Olguin, which had been dismissed with prejudice, and said the Ninth Circuit dismissed Sivak’s appeals in those cases.
The opinion does not describe the underlying claims in detail. It states only that Sivak sought damages based on actions taken by Judge Martinez-Olguin in her judicial capacity.
Ruling
The court dismissed the case with prejudice. It held that Judge Martinez-Olguin is protected by judicial immunity from civil claims for damages arising from actions taken in her role as a judge. Judicial immunity generally means that a judge cannot be sued for damages based on judicial acts. The court did not address the merits of any underlying claim.
The court ordered the case closed and stated that no further filings would be accepted. It also stated that Sivak may appeal the judge’s decisions to the Ninth Circuit as circumstances warrant.
Disposition
The case was dismissed with prejudice, and the case was ordered closed. The opinion is signed by James Donato, United States District Judge.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.