California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Imig v. Ferrar, 138 Cal.Rptr. 540, 70 Cal.App.3d 48 (Cal. App. 1977):
Plaintiff contends that even if his cause of action for defamation is precluded by the absolute privilege, he has adequately stated a cause of action for malicious prosecution in the fourth count. The rule is stated in Albertson v. Raboff, 46 Cal.2d 375, 382, 295 P.2d 405, 410, that 'the fact that a communication may be absolutely privileged for the purposes of a defamation action does not prevent its being an element of an action for malicious prosecution in a proper case. The policy of encouraging free access to the courts that underlies the absolute privilege applicable in defamation actions is outweighed by the policy of affording redress for individual wrongs when the requirements of favorable termination, lack of probable cause, and malice are satisfied.'
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.