Do legislative witnesses have absolute privilege from defamation claims in Utah? Riddle v. Perry Explained

In Riddle v. Perry, the Utah Supreme Court addressed an issue of first impression: whether legislative witnesses enjoy privilege from defamation liability when testifying before legislative committees.

Background and Facts
Lester Perry, an attorney representing plaintiffs in class action suits against debt collection attorneys, attended a Utah House committee hearing on a bill to amend the state’s civil check law. Jesse Riddle, a debt collection attorney who had prepared a draft of the bill, did not attend the hearing. During public comment, Perry made statements implying that Riddle had bribed the legislator who sponsored the bill. Both the committee parliamentarian and Perry acknowledged the statement was “out of order.” Riddle subsequently sued Perry for defamation.

Key Legal Issues
The court addressed two primary questions: (1) whether statements by voluntary witnesses before legislative committees are privileged, and (2) whether Perry’s statement was sufficiently related to the legislative hearing’s subject matter. The trial court had granted Perry’s motion to dismiss on privilege grounds.

Court’s Analysis and Holding
The Utah Supreme Court established an absolute privilege for legislative witnesses, adopting the standard from Restatement (Second) of Torts § 590A. The court held that witnesses are “absolutely privileged to publish defamatory matter as part of a legislative proceeding” if the matter has “some relation to the proceeding.” The court emphasized that Utah’s constitutional policy of encouraging legislative participation requires protecting citizen witnesses from defamation liability. Applying a broad interpretation of the relationship requirement, the court found Perry’s bribery allegations were sufficiently related to the bill discussion because the propriety of the bill’s origins was relevant to the committee’s decision-making process.

Practice Implications
This decision provides strong protection for citizens participating in legislative proceedings. Practitioners should note that the privilege applies to voluntary witnesses and extends beyond formal testimony to include public comment periods. The “some relation” standard is interpreted broadly, favoring privilege protection to encourage citizen participation in democratic processes.