Priore v. Haig (Concurrence)

Summary

Justice D’Auria, joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Ecker, concurs in part and in the judgment. He agrees that the defendant did not establish that the public hearing was quasi-judicial and therefore did not establish entitlement to absolute immunity under the litigation privilege, but disagrees with portions of the majority’s reasoning concerning the plaintiff’s opportunity to respond, due process, and the anti-SLAPP statute. He would leave for another case whether the hearing was legislative and whether statements made there could receive legislative absolute immunity.