In section 1983 and 1985 actions filed by plaintiff-litigant in state court divorce proceeding against defendants-two circuit court judges, alleging that defendants took extrajudicial efforts to prejudice presiding judge in divorce matter against plaintiff and in favor of plaintiffs’ wife, Dist. Ct. erred in granting motion to dismiss prior to due date of plaintiff’s response to motion to dismiss. Moreover, Dist. Ct. erred in finding that absolute judicial immunity barred plaintiff’s actions against one defendant, where said defendant was accused of sending improper ex-parte communication to presiding judge that accused plaintiff of being security risk under circumstances, and where said defendant was close friend of plaintiff’s wife, since said defendant’s alleged actions concerned interference in case to which said defendant had not been assigned and over which she had no judicial responsibility. Other defendant, who served as Presiding Judge in court’s Domestic Relations Division, was entitled to judicial immunity, where said defendant was acting in her administrative capacity by responding to letter from plaintiff’s counsel (and serving said response on presiding judge in divorce matter), and where said defendant’s response formed basis of plaintiff’s lawsuit. Too, dismissal of plaintiff’s case against both defendants was proper, where: (1) plaintiff had failed to assert in section 1983 claim that he had suffered any adverse consequences to his parental rights as result of alleged prejudice of presiding judge in divorce matter; and (2) plaintiff had failed to assert in section 1985 claim that defendants targeted him because of his membership in defined class.