Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Cady v. Arenac County, No. 08-1795

By FindLaw Staff on July 30, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action claiming that the state, as a condition for dismissing the criminal assault and battery charges pending against plaintiff, wrongfully required plaintiff to agree to temporarily refrain from filing a civil lawsuit against the parties with whom he had a physical altercation, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where a prosecutor's allegedly improper motive alone is not enough to defeat absolute immunity, so long as the general nature of his actions falls within the scope of his duties as an advocate for the state.

Read Cady v. Arenac County, No. 08-1795

Appellate Information

Argued: March 13, 2009

Decided and Filed: July 30, 2009


Opinion by Judge Gilman

Concurrence by Judge Martin


For Appellant:

Russell C. Babcock, The Mastromarco Firm, Saginaw, MI

For Appellees:

Jason David Kolkema, Johnson, Rosati, LaBarge, Aseltyne & Field, P.G., Lansing, MI

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard