Justices of the Supreme Court and those acting pursuant to orders or rules of Court as their employees or agents, including but not limited to members of the Guam Bar Association Ethics Committee, designated Ethics Prosecutors, and their employees or agents, shall not be held liable for any action performed in the course of their official duties undertaken pursuant to this Article relative to the discipline of attorneys and to the unauthorized practice of law.

SOURCE: Amended by P.L.27-31:35 (Oct. 31, 2003).

1985 SOURCE: Govt. Code § 28058 added by P.L. 17-62. Standard 3.10, Immunity, tent. draft, Lawyer Disciplinary and Disability Proceedings, ABA, 1978.

1985 COMMENT: Immunity protects the independent judgment of the Bar of Guam and avoids diverting the attention of its personnel as well as its resources towards resisting collateral attack and harassment.

The ABA standard recommends absolute privilege rather than a qualified privilege, because qualified privilege does not protect against harassment made possible by simply alleging malice in a law suit. See Yaselli v Goff, 12 F.2d (1926), aff’d 276 U.S. 503 (1927) [malicious prosecution]; Imbler v Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) [civil rights action].

Conduct on the part of personnel which is not authorized or exceeds assigned duty is not protected.

Commentary to Standard 3.10 – Immunity, ABA, Tent. draft, 1978.

———-

COL292017
7 Guam Code Ann. CIVIL PROCEDURE
CH. 9 ATTORNEYS

ARTICLE 2
GUAM LAW LIBRARY

2016 NOTE: References to the “”Territorial Law Library”” changed to “”Guam
Law Library”” pursuant to 1 Guam Code Ann. § 420.