Legal Opinion
Rehberg v. Paulk
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided April 2, 2012No. 10-788PublishedCited by 800 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Alito
This case requires ús to decide whether a “complaining witness” in a grand jury proceeding is entitled to the same immunity in an action under 42 U. S. C. § 1983 as a witness who testifies at trial. We see no sound reason to draw a distinction for this purpose between grand jury and trial witnesses.
I
Petitioner Charles Rehberg, a certified public accountant, sent anonymous faxes to several recipients, including the management of a hospital in Albany, Georgia, criticizing the hospital’s management and activities. In response, the local district attorney’s office, with the assistance of its…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Albright v. OliverSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Imbler v. PachtmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Malley v. BriggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by800 opinions
- Michael Lacey v. Joseph ArpaioCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Ziglar v. AbbasiSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
- Manuel v. City of JolietSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
- Figueroa v. MazzaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2016
- Thomas v. KavenCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
795 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.