J. David John v. Martin T. Faitak, ph.D.

Summary

The court held that Dr. Faitak was not entitled to quasi-judicial immunity because the alleged individual diagnosis, disclosure, confidentiality breach, and settlement-brokering conduct fell outside the scope of his court-appointed counseling order. It reversed the summary judgment ruling, vacated the court of appeals’ opinion, and remanded for further proceedings. The court treated disputed facts in the light most favorable to John when deciding immunity as a matter of law.