Opinion ID: 3016490
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Absolute Immunity Jurisdiction

Text: 6 “The Supreme Court has repeatedly applied the collateral order doctrine to hold that orders denying absolute immunity are reviewable on interlocutory appeal.” Walker, 286 F.3d at 709. This is because, as the Court has explained, “absolute immunity creates not only protection from liability, but also a right not to stand trial.” Id at 710. (citing Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 525 (1985). The Supreme Court and this Court have held that an order denying a motion for summary judgment predicated upon a substantial claim of absolute immunity is collateral to the merits of the action and immediately reviewable. See Mitchell v, Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511,525 (1985); Schrob v. Catterson, 948 F.2d 1402, 1407 n.4 (3d Cir. 1991); In re Montgomery County, 215 F.3d 367, 373 (3d Cir. 2000). Thus, the denial of Appellant’s motion for summary judgment on the basis of absolute immunity is collateral to the merits of the action and is immediately reviewable. Accordingly, this Court has jurisdiction over the interlocutory appeal regarding the claim of absolute immunity.