Krile v. Lawyer

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court reviewed the dismissal of Robyn Krile’s defamation claims against Assistant State’s Attorney Julie Lawyer. The court held that the district court properly considered materials embraced by the pleadings without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) motion into summary judgment, but addressed whether communications concerning Krile’s Giglio impairment were protected by absolute privilege. The appeal was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Holdings

1. A district court may consider materials embraced by the pleadings and materials that are part of the public record without converting a Rule 12(b)(6) motion into a Rule 56 motion. The Giglio letter and Lawyer's affidavits were documents on which Krile's claims relied and were therefore embraced by the pleadings.
2. A prosecutor's disclosure of a Giglio letter to a police chief, informing the chief that the prosecutor considered the officer Giglio impaired and that the prosecutor's office would not use the officer as a witness, is not absolutely privileged under N.D.C.C. § 14-02-05(1) when the prosecutor is acting in an administrative capacity rather than performing an activity intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.
3. A prosecutor's submission of a Giglio letter and affidavits in response to a request from the North Dakota Department of Labor and Human Rights during its statutory investigation is absolutely privileged under N.D.C.C. § 14-02-05(2) as a communication made in a proceeding authorized by law.
4. The record was insufficient to determine whether Lawyer disclosed the Giglio letter to the POST Board or whether any disclosure occurred as part of a POST Board investigation. If the disclosure occurred as part of such an investigation, it would be absolutely privileged under N.D.C.C. § 14-02-05(2).
5. The communications to Chief Donlin and possibly the POST Board may be protected by a qualified privilege, but the Supreme Court declined to decide that issue because it was not addressed below. Krile's claim concerning disclosure to Lincoln Police Chief Gibbs also required consideration on remand.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court improperly considered documents attached to the Rule 12(b)(6) motion without converting it to a motion for summary judgment.
2. Whether Lawyer's disclosure of the Giglio letter to Police Chief Donlin was absolutely privileged as a communication made in the proper discharge of an official duty.
3. Whether Lawyer's disclosure of the Giglio letter and affidavits to the Department of Labor and Human Rights was absolutely privileged as part of a proceeding authorized by law.
4. Whether the alleged disclosure of the Giglio letter to the POST Board was absolutely privileged under N.D.C.C. § 14-02-05(2).
5. Whether Krile's claims based on the alleged disclosure to Lincoln Police Chief Gibbs required remand because the district court had not addressed them.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded