Robinson v. V. D. (2024)

Citation: Robinson v. V. D. (2024)
Parent Document: Robinson v. V. D. (2024)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2024-11-26
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10282961/robinson-v-v-d/ ↗

Full Text

2,472 chars

effect on employees who may have good faith criticisms
          regarding the hiring practices of powerful government
          agencies like the Coast Guard. In short, we are per-
          suaded that the union grievance proceedings at issue
          were quasi-judicial in nature.
             Very little additional discussion is warranted as to
          whether the proceeding pertaining to the application
          for a civil protection order was a judicial proceeding
          for purposes of absolute immunity. The filing of the
          application initiated an action in the Superior Court that
          resulted in a hearing at which a judge heard testimony,
          ascertained the relevant facts, and exercised judgment
          and discretion in applying the relevant law. The decision
          on the application potentially affected the personal
          rights of the parties. Applications for civil protection
          orders will often involve the disclosure of highly per-
          sonal and potentially unfavorable information that is
          highly pertinent to the order being sought. Sound public
          policy favors granting absolute immunity in this context
          so that parties seeking the court’s protection will not
          be chilled from bringing these matters to the attention
          of the court for fear of subsequent civil litigation.
             Having reviewed the allegations set forth in the com-
          plaint; see footnotes 11 and 12 of this opinion; we con-
          clude that the written statements and/or factual asser-
          tions that the defendant allegedly made regarding the
          plaintiffs in his grievance application and in the applica-
          tion seeking a civil protection order, as well as any
          oral statements or testimony made during the hearings
          before the Superior Court or the Coast Guard adminis-
          trative officials, qualify as statements made during the
          course of a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding. Specifi-
          cally, the subject matter of the alleged statements and
          assertions—irrespective of their veracity or any ill
          intent on the part of the defendant—all directly related
          either to the defendant’s purported rationale for bring-
          ing his union grievance or for seeking a civil protection
0, 0                    CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                      Page 19

Other Sections in This Document (85)

Full Text