Court Allows Lawsuit Against Justice
Teammate of Jurist's Son Alleges
Abuse of Power in Head-butt Case

By Kate Coscarelli
Star-Ledger
August 14, 2008

A civil rights lawsuit against New Jersey Supreme Court Justice Roberto Rivera-Soto can proceed on the claim that he used the power of his office when he intervened in a dispute between his son and another high school student, a judge ruled yesterday.

In an 89-page decision, state Superior Court Judge Linda Feinberg threw out most of the lawsuit, including claims against the state and against Rivera-Soto in his official capacity. But the judge found the allegation that Rivera-Soto interfered with Conor Larkin's due process rights should "survive" and be fleshed out.

"In alleging Rivera-Soto attempted to interfere with plaintiff's constitutionally protected rights while acting under color of law" the violation of civil rights charge will be allowed to continue, wrote Feinberg.

Feinberg dismissed the lawsuit's claims against the state for not training the jurist about how he should behave in private situations. She ruled the justice's actions were "too far removed from Rivera-Soto's official duties and the workplace for the court to impose a duty of care in this case."

Feinberg also declined to recuse herself from the case, saying no one could doubt her impartiality and that she "is not biased."

Douglas Eakeley, who represented the judge in his official capacity, said he was satisfied with the ruling.

"It's right on," he said. "Under our civil rights act you can't sue the state."

The jurist's personal attorney, Bruce McMoran, was out of the office, and Clifford Van Syoc, who represented Larkin, could not be reached for comment.

In the lawsuit filed earlier this year, Conor Larkin, a former Haddonfield High School football star, claims his rights to an education and due process were violated when Rivera-Soto injected himself into a 2006 dispute between Larkin and the justice's son, Christian.

After a head-butting incident at football practice, Rivera-Soto filed a juvenile delinquency complaint against Larkin. At various points in the investigation, Rivera-Soto called the football coach, police and judges in the case.

The Supreme Court censured Rivera-Soto for his behavior.

Larkin's lawyer has argued the justice abused the power of his position for personal reasons. Lawyers for Rivera-Soto contend he acted as a concerned father and Larkin has no case since he was never expelled, suspended or even missed a football game.

Yesterday, Feinberg said Larkin's lawyers are entitled to learn more about conversations Rivera-Soto had with school officials. They can seek more information to "determine if Rivera-Soto ... tried to 'bully' the school administrators into punishing or suspending the plaintiff and thereby infringing on his constitutional right," Feinberg ruled.

http://www.nj.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news-11/1218688563273060.xml&coll=1

Index to Articles]