La Drea Johnson v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaApril 12, 20242:24-cv-00475California760 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

I. DISCUSSION

A. Defendants Appear To Be Immune From Plaintiff’s State Law IIED Claim Under Cal. Gov’t Code § 821.6. Under Cal. Gov’t Code § 821.6, a “public employee is not liable for injury caused by his instituting or prosecuting any judicial or administrative proceeding within the scope of his employment, even if he acts maliciously and without probable cause.” Cal. Gov’t Code § 821.6. When interpreting state law, a federal court is bound by the decision of the highest state court.” Garmon v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 828 F.3d 837, 847 (9th Cir. 2016). The California Supreme Court has held that the immunity conferred by Section 821.6 can extend beyond “prosecuting attorneys and other similar individuals . . . to police officers as well . . . depending on how the injury is caused.” Leon v. Cnty. of Riverside, 14 Cal. 5th 910, 918–19 (2023) (internal quotations and citations omitted). Under California law, “a police officer may be held liable for false arrest and false imprisonment, but not for malicious prosecution.” Id. (citing Asgari v. City of Los Angeles, 15 Cal. 4th 744, 757 (1997)). Section 821.6’s “immunity is narrow in the sense that it applies only if the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.