In Rosenthal v. Vogt (1991) 229 Cal. App. 3d 69, the plaintiff, Rosenthal, sued the State Bar of California and several of its employees alleging wrongful conduct in connection with his disbarment proceedings. Rosenthal claimed the defendants "conducted the proceedings unfairly, vindictively, and out of personal motivation of hatred, including suppressing evidence, restricting plaintiff's defense, admitting inadmissible evidence, and other behavior calculated and effective to deny plaintiff a fair hearing." (Ibid.) Rosenthal argued the defendants could not claim immunity under section 821.6 because they did not act lawfully in discharging their functions, thus could not have been acting within the scope of their employment. ( Id. at p. 75.) The court rejected this argument, stating section 821.6 "extends to the pursuit of proceedings within the scope of the employee's assigned employment; the immunity is not limited to activities lawfully performed." (Ibid.)