Background:

• • The appellants, Gary Curtis and Tanya Rebello, claimed that Eric Turkienicz, a lawyer, knowingly allowed false statements in an affidavit in a prior lawsuit (Rebello v. Del Property Management et al.).
  • The appellants alleged that Mr. Turkienicz failed to disclose certain security reports, which harmed them.
  • Mr. Curtis also had a separate ongoing action, but did not include Mr. Turkienicz as a defendant in that case.

Procedural History:

• The respondents moved to strike the appellants' claim, and the appellants countered with a motion for default judgment. The Superior Court struck the claim, and the appellants appealed.

Key Issues:

• Whether the claims against Mr. Turkienicz and his wife were valid.
• Whether absolute privilege (legal immunity) applied to Mr. Turkienicz's conduct as counsel.
• Whether the appellants should be granted leave to amend their claim.

Court’s Decision:

• The doctrine of absolute privilege applied, shielding Mr. Turkienicz from liability related to his role in court proceedings.
• The claim against Michelle Turkienicz was dismissed as she had no involvement in the allegations.
• Leave to amend was granted to Mr. Curtis, but only to pursue a malicious prosecution claim, limited to 30 days for filing.

Costs:

• The appellants were ordered to pay costs ($18,154) due to the frivolous nature of their claims, with no costs awarded for the appeal.

Outcome: Appeal allowed in part, allowing Mr. Curtis to amend his claim, but the court upheld most of the original rulings.