Bianchi v. McQueen

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants’ motion to dismiss instant section 1983 action on absolute and qualified immunity grounds, where plaintiffs-state’s attorney and others alleged that defendants-asst. special prosecutor and investigators violated plaintiffs’ due process, 1^st and 4^th Amendment rights by fabricating evidence and withholding exculpatory evidence, where defendants ultimately obtained indictment against plaintiffs on charge that plaintiffs had improperly politicked while on county time. Defendant-asst. special prosecutor was entitled to absolute prosecutorial immunity, where he was appointed asst. special prosecutor under 55 ILCS section 5/3-9008, and where large portion of complaint pertained to his alleged actions in presenting false evidence to grand jury. Moreover, while asst. special prosecutor was not entitled to absolute immunity with respect to his investigation activities, all defendants were entitled to qualified immunity with respect to their investigation activities, where: (1) defendants’ alleged fabricated evidence did not result in plaintiffs being deprived of liberty for purposes of their due process claim; (2) plaintiffs’ alleged violation of Brady duty to disclose material exculpatory evidence did not result in prejudice to plaintiffs, since plaintiffs were acquitted of all charges; (3) plaintiffs failed to adequately allege causal connection between any alleged retaliatory animosity against plaintiff-state’s attorney for holding office and instant false indictment; and (4) plaintiffs failed to state adequate false arrest claim, where plaintiffs’ arrests came only after they were indicted, and where plaintiffs’ claim was actually claim for malicious prosecution.