Citation network
Westfall Vs. Erwin
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 13, 1988
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
-
U.S. 292 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court Westfall v. ErwinSearch
-
U.S. 292 (1988) Westfall v. ErwinSearch
-
within the scope of their employment, before the conduct is absolutely immune from state law tort liability. See Doe v. McMillanSearch
-
F.2d 1551, 1552 (CA11 1986) (quoting Johns v. PettiboneSearch
-
We affirm. II In Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
U. S. 564 (1959), and Howard v. LyonsSearch
-
will be promoted if officials are freed of the costs of vexatious and often frivolous damages suits. See Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
initially ask that we endorse the approach followed by the Fourth and Eighth Circuits, see General Electric Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Poolman v. NelsonSearch
-
functions finds no support in the traditional justification for official immunity. Moreover, in Doe v. McMillanSearch
-
under the circumstances, and thus loses sight of the underlying purpose of official immunity doctrine. See Doe v. McMillanSearch
-
Compare General Electric Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 813 F.2d 1273, 1276-1277 (CA4 1987), and Poolman v. NelsonSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
officials absolutely immune from state law tort suits for conduct within the scope of their employment), with Johns v. PettiboneSearch
-
Corp., 769 F.2d 724, 728 (CA11 1985), and Araujo v. WelchSearch
-
inquiry -- immunity attaches to particular official functions, not to particular offices. See, e.g., Forrester v. WhiteSearch
-
We recognize that the plurality opinion in Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
that conduct within the outer perimeter of an official's duties is automatically immune from suit. See, e.g., Poolman v. NelsonSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Westfall v. ErwinSearch
-
See Doe v. McMillanSearch
-
Johns v. PettiboneSearch
-
II In Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
and Howard v. LyonsSearch
-
See Barr v. MatteoSearch
-
General Electric Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
and Poolman v. NelsonSearch
-
and Araujo v. WelchSearch
-
Forrester v. WhiteSearch
-
Barr v. MatteoSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial