## Facts

- John J. Miner, a Harford County deputy sheriff, arrested Joseph A. Novotny for driving while intoxicated; the arrest was contentious, and Novotny was also charged with assaulting Miner.
- Two days later, Novotny filed a sworn “Complaint of Brutality” with the Harford County Sheriff’s Office, alleging Miner kicked, choked, and otherwise abused him during and after the arrest.
- The Sheriff’s Office investigated internally and concluded Miner committed no misconduct.
- Miner sued Novotny in the Circuit Court for Harford County for (1) defamation, (2) intentional infliction of emotional distress, and (3) malicious abuse of civil administrative proceedings.
- The circuit court sustained Novotny’s demurrer to all counts without leave to amend; Miner appealed only the defamation dismissal.
- The Court of Special Appeals affirmed, reasoning the complaint was absolutely privileged as a petition for redress of grievances.
- The Court of Appeals granted review to decide whether an officer may sue a complainant for defamation based on statements in a formal brutality complaint.

## Issues

1. Whether a citizen’s sworn complaint of police brutality filed with an appropriate law-enforcement authority is protected by an absolute privilege that bars a defamation action by the accused officer.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Maryland affirmed dismissal of the defamation claim.
- The court held that statements in a sworn police brutality complaint to the appropriate supervising law-enforcement authority are absolutely privileged.
- The court agreed with the lower court’s result but grounded the rule primarily in Maryland common-law absolute privilege and public policy, rather than relying exclusively on the First Amendment Petition Clause.

## Legal Principles

- Defamation law recognizes privileges that can be absolute or qualified; absolute privilege provides immunity even for false or malicious statements when public policy requires unfettered communication.
- Absolute privilege extends beyond traditional judicial and legislative settings to communications closely connected to official oversight functions, including certain investigative and disciplinary processes.
- Sworn brutality complaints to supervisory authorities are treated as part of an official review mechanism; the public interest in uninhibited reporting of alleged officer misconduct justifies absolute immunity.
- A qualified privilege (defeasible by proof of malice) is inadequate in this context because the risk and burden of litigation can chill citizen reporting; absolute privilege is required to prevent deterrence through retaliatory defamation suits.

## Conclusion

Maryland law bars a police officer’s defamation suit based on a citizen’s sworn brutality complaint filed with the proper law-enforcement authority because the complaint is absolutely privileged to protect free reporting of alleged misconduct and the effectiveness of official oversight.


Miner v. Novotny, 498 A.2d 269 (Md. 1985)