Panitz v. Behrend

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that witness immunity includes not just in-court testimony but also “all communications issued in the regular course of judicial proceedings and which are pertinent and material to the redress or relief sought”
• stating that the immunity “has now been extended to include all tort actions based on statements made during judicial proceedings”
• recognizing an absolute privilege for judges, lawyers, litigants, and witnesses regarding statements made during legal actions
• recognizing an absolute privilege for judges, lawyers, litigants, and witnesses regarding statements made during legal actions
• allowing a party to litigation to contract with an expert witness and thereby obligate the witness to testify only in a manner favorable to that party on threat of civil liability would be contrary to public policy
• applying witness immunity doctrine to an expert because “[t]he primary purpose of expert testimony is not to assist one party or another in winning the case but to assist the trier of the facts in understanding complicated matters.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).