In what circumstances will a defendant have to seek interlocutory review of his claim of absolute immunity for false testimony?

MultiRegion, United States of America

The following excerpt is from San Filippo v. U.S. Trust Co. of New York, Inc., 737 F.2d 246 (2nd Cir. 1984):

In the instant case, defendants have alleged substantial enough arguments in favor of extending immunity for false testimony itself to conspiracies to testify falsely, see infra, to defeat any suggestion that their claim ofimmunity is frivolous. Furthermore, in the event that claim did prevail, the argument made in Briggs v. Goodwin, supra, for the ineffectiveness of appeal from final judgment when immunity rights are abridged would apply with equal force here. Therefore, we conclude that defendants are entitled to interlocutory review of their immunity claim.

Having said that, we nonetheless reject the absolute immunity claim on its merits. Briscoe v. LaHue, supra, was expressly limited to immunity for testimony given in judicial proceedings, and its rationale--to encourage witnesses to come forward with all they know--does not justify extending that immunity to cover extra-judicial conspiracies between witnesses and the prosecutor to give false testimony. Nor do we find persuasive defendants' argument that absent the immunity they now seek, every witness could be intimidated by the prospect of defending a civil suit charging 'conspiracy' to give false testimony, just as easily as a suit charging false testimony. Insofar as witnesses may face groundless 'conspiracy' suits, ample protection against costly defense should ordinarily be provided by the possibility of 12(b)(6) dismissal or summary judgment in defendants' favor.

Other Questions


What is the test for reviewing a Fourth Amendment claim in circumstances where the petitioner has neither pleaded nor proved the denial of a full and fair opportunity to litigate that claim in state courts? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
If a federal claim is not "adjudicated on the merits" in a state court, if the state court rejects the federal claim, what is the legal test for review of the claim? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Is a petitioner who has procedurally defaulted by not raising a claim on direct review or collateral review barred from raising it on collateral review? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Can a petitioner who has had a full and fair review of his Fourth Amendment claims in state court seek to have those claims reviewed by the federal appeals court? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is the test for reviewing a Fourth Amendment claim in circumstances where the petitioner has neither pleaded nor proved the denial of a full and fair opportunity to litigate that claim in the state courts? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
For the purposes of denying a motion for judicial review of a decision by the Board of Arbitration for Justice denying an application to review the denial of the motion, in what circumstances will the motion be reviewed? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is qualified immunity for a claim for damages against a defendant who is also a defendant in a civil case? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
In what circumstances will a court grant qualified immunity to a defendant who admitted making a false statement in a search warrant application? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is the test for a false claim under the False Claims Act? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Does absolute immunity apply to a witness against a claim based on their testimony? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.