Citation network
Doe Vs. Mcmillan
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 29, 1973
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 306 (1973) U.S. Supreme Court Doe v. McMillanSearch
-
U.S. 306 (1973) Doe v. McMillanSearch
-
the D.C. officials and the legislative employees were protected by the official immunity doctrine recognized in Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
Printer and the Superintendent of Documents are protected by the doctrine of official immunity enunciated in Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
cl. 1, as well as the reach of official immunity in the legislative context. See Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
against them because of the Speech or Debate Clause and that the official immunity doctrine recognized in Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
Gravel v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. JohnsonSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
hearing, although the Page 412 U. S. 314 hearing was unquestionably part of the legislative process. Gravel v. UnitedSearch
-
with respect to legislative or other matters before the House. Gravel v. UnitedSearch
-
ordering or voting for a publication going beyond the reasonable requirements of the legislative function, Kilbourn v. ThompsonSearch
-
functionaries carrying out such nonlegislative directives than it protected the Sergeant at Arms in Kilbourn v. ThompsonSearch
-
Powell v. McCormackSearch
-
Dombrowski v. EastlandSearch
-
Tenney v. BrandhoveSearch
-
officers with discretionary functions, have been held absolutely immune regardless of their motive or good faith. Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
should be determined by the relation of the publication complained of to the duties entrusted to the officer. Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
see also the companion case, Howard v. LyonsSearch
-
Powell v. McCormackSearch
-
of the statutory duties of the Public Printer and the Superintendent of Documents. Barr v. MateoSearch
-
of the department. Howard v. LyonsSearch
-
U. S. 569 . We do, however, write in the Page 412 U. S. 324 shadow of Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSearch
-
U. S. 564 (1972), and Wisconsin v. ConstantineauSearch
-
copies of the materials at issue and distributed them to the public at the direction of his superiors. See Dombrowski v. EastlandSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Doe v. McMillanSearch
-
See Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
the House. Gravel v. UnitedSearch
-
of the Public Printer and the Superintendent of Documents. Barr v. MateoSearch
-
of Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSearch
-
and Wisconsin v. ConstantineauSearch
-
See Dombrowski v. EastlandSearch
-
United States v. BrewsterSearch
-
Barr v. MatteoSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial