A plaintiff alleging misfeasance in public office based on multiple acts by different officers of a public authority must plead with specificity the facts establishing the requisite state of mind for each officer at the time of each impugned act, and cannot rely on aggregation of the states of mind of various officers without pleading a basis for such aggregation. Conduct by officers that consists of providing information, making recommendations, or making statements — rather than exercising or purporting to exercise statutory power — cannot ground a claim of misfeasance in public office. Damages must be linked to each specific act of misfeasance rather than claimed globally.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 15 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 15 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.