In the case of Cleavenger v. B.O., 2022-Ohio-454, the Ohio Ninth District Court of Appeals held that the trial court properly granted a motion to dismiss a 42 U.S.C. 1983 (“Section 1983”) claim alleging that an alleged crime victim made false statements to the police and at trial about an alleged crime the plaintiff committed.
In support of dismissing the allegation that the alleged crime victim made false statements to the police, the Court explained that, to establish a claim under Section 1983, a plaintiff must prove that the conduct at issue was committed by a person acting under the authority of state law. Although a claim of conspiracy between a private actor and a state actor is sufficient to establish that the private actor acted under the authority of state law for the purposes of defeating a motion to dismiss a Section 1983 claim, the Court concluded that the plaintiff failed to adequately allege facts supporting a claim of conspiracy necessary to establish that the alleged crime victim was acting under the authority of state law.
In support of dismissing the allegation that the alleged crime victim made false statements at trial, the Court concluded that, even if the alleged crime victim committed perjury, the alleged crime victim enjoyed absolute immunity because, under Section 1983, individuals who testify at trial enjoy absolute immunity in connection to their testimony.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always-changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.