Opinion ID: 791971
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Ruling of the District Court as to Absolute Immunity

Text: 14 The ADAs moved pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss the claims against them on various grounds, including failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted and absolute immunity. In an Order of Partial Dismissal dated October 3, 2003, the court, inter alia, granted the ADAs' motions to dismiss (1) all claims against them in their official capacities, (2) all state-law claims except certain claims for malicious prosecution, and (3) all claims for malicious prosecution—whether under § 1983 or state law—that were based on events that occurred prior to Shmueli's arraignment. In sum, the court denied the ADAs' motions only to the extent that they sought dismissal of the § 1983 and state-law claims against them in their individual capacities for malicious prosecution in connection with the events following Shmueli's arraignment (the postarraignment malicious prosecution claims). 15 To the extent pertinent to the present appeal, the court rejected the ADAs' defense of absolute immunity on the postarraignment malicious prosecution claims, stating its reasons on the record as follows: 16 Absolute immunity does confer broad protection upon prosecutors from civil liability for their official duties. Yet, where the prosecutor acts without clear jurisdiction and without any colorable claim of authority the prosecutor loses the absolute immunity he would otherwise enjoy. Rodrigue[s] v. City of New York, 193 A.D.2d 79, 86, 602 N.Y.S.2d 337 (1st Dept.1993). Plaintiff specifically alleges that the ADAs knew the charges against her were false and knew that Shmueli was innocent of the alleged offenses, but the ADAs prosecuted it [sic] nonetheless. Thus, plaintiff has sufficiently alleged acts by the ADA defendants that, if true, would be in clear absence of all jurisdiction. So,. . . at least on a 12(b)(6) motion, there is enough here for me to say that absolute immunity does not bar this 1983 claim as of now—I repeat, as of now. 17 (Transcript, October 3, 2003 (Tr.)), at 16-17 (emphasis added).