New York Court of Appeals
Jorge Arteaga, Appellant v. State of New York, Respondent; Michael Treacy, Appellant, v. State of New York, Respondent
June 9, 198872 N.Y.2d 212
Summary
The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division, holding that correction officers’ investigative and disciplinary actions are discretionary quasi‑judicial functions that attract absolute immunity, thereby barring the inmates’ tort claims for malicious prosecution and false imprisonment. The Court reasoned that the officers acted under the authority of Correction Law §§ 112, 137 and related regulations, and that the State’s waiver of sovereign immunity under the Court of Claims Act does not extend to such discretionary conduct. The dissent argued that correction officers should only enjoy qualified immunity and would reverse the judgment.