Monday, April 2, 2012

Supreme Court Decides Witness Immunity

The Supreme Court today rejected a "complaining witness exception" to absolute immunity in § 1983 cases for testimony. The case is Rehberg v. Paulk. The holding extends trial witness immunity to grand jury testimony of the police investigator, adding to the previous immunity for preliminary hearing witnesses. The testimonial immunity extends to related conspiracy claims that depend on that testimony.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-788.pdf

Therefore, caseworkers cannot be sued for false testimony.

There is some hope for liability for false statements by caseworkers that are non-testimonial. Rehburg expressly preserves qualified immunity for a false warrant affidavit, which is analogous to a CPS request for a removal order. Also, if a CPS caseworker can fit the Court's definition of a true complaining witness--a person who initiates the proceeding--perhaps the worker has only qualified immunity for a false initial complaint. See footnote 1 and part IVA. That depends on whether courts will treat the CPS investigator-complainant more like a prosecutor (absolute immunity) or a police officer (qualified immunity).

Elizabeth Warner, Attorney
Jackson, Michigan
(517) 788-6004
eswarner@aol.com
Web site: www.eswarnerlaw.com

What could possibly be wrong with this?  I am virtually HEARING the Swastikas clanking.

No comments:

Post a Comment