Harlow v. Fitzgerald: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|date=June 1982 | |date=June 1982 | ||
|subject=Administrative Law | |subject=Administrative Law | ||
|facts=Fitzgerald (plaintiff) is dismissed after giving a testimony to the U.S. Congress. At the testimony hearing, he complains about cost overruns. | |facts=Fitzgerald (plaintiff) is dismissed after giving a testimony to the U.S. Congress. At the testimony hearing, he complains about cost overruns. | ||
| Line 11: | Line 10: | ||
|holding=Federal officials performing discretionary duties aren't protected by absolute immunity like POTUS; they are protected by '''qualified immunity'''. | |holding=Federal officials performing discretionary duties aren't protected by absolute immunity like POTUS; they are protected by '''qualified immunity'''. | ||
|rule=POTUS, members of Congress, and federal judges are protected by absolute immunity. | |rule=POTUS, members of Congress, and federal judges are protected by absolute immunity. | ||
Almost all other federal officials including the members of the President's cabinet are protected by qualified immunity. | |||
|comments=*[[Section_1983_Litigation/Personal_Liability:_Qualified_Immunity#Summary_Judgment_Motions_Before_and_After_Discovery.3B_Discovery_on_Disputed_Factual_Issues]] | |comments=*[[Section_1983_Litigation/Personal_Liability:_Qualified_Immunity#Summary_Judgment_Motions_Before_and_After_Discovery.3B_Discovery_on_Disputed_Factual_Issues]] | ||
*''[[Imbler v. Pachtman]]'' | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/harlow-v-fitzgerald | |link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/harlow-v-fitzgerald | ||
|case_text_source=Quimbee | |source_type=Video summary | ||
|case_text_source=Quimbee | |||
}} | }} | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 03:39, July 14, 2023
| Harlow v. Fitzgerald | |
| Court | Supreme Court of the United States |
|---|---|
| Citation | |
| Date decided | June 1982 |
Facts
Fitzgerald (plaintiff) is dismissed after giving a testimony to the U.S. Congress. At the testimony hearing, he complains about cost overruns.
Fitzgerald files a complaint with the United States Civil Service Commission. The examiner at the Civil Service Commission found that the re-organization at the Air Force was impermissible. The dismissal of Fitzgerald occurred improperly. However, the examiner didn't regard Fitzgerald's termination as retaliatory.Procedural History
Fitzgerald filed a federal lawsuit for damages (monetary award for the harm he suffered). He alleged that the Nixon administration officials including Bryce Harlow (defendant) had deprived him of his career and ruined his reputation.
Issues
To what extent are federal officials protected by absolute immunity?
Holding
Federal officials performing discretionary duties aren't protected by absolute immunity like POTUS; they are protected by qualified immunity.
Rule
POTUS, members of Congress, and federal judges are protected by absolute immunity.
Almost all other federal officials including the members of the President's cabinet are protected by qualified immunity.
