| dbo:abstract
|
- Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978), is the leading United States Supreme Court decision on judicial immunity. It involved an Indiana judge who was sued by a young woman who had been sterilized without her knowledge as a minor in accordance with the judge's order. The Supreme Court held that the judge was immune from being sued for issuing the order because it was issued as a judicial function. The case has been called one of the most controversial in recent Supreme Court history. (en)
|
| dbo:thumbnail
| |
| dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
| |
| dbo:wikiPageID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageLength
|
- 19704 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
|
| dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
| dbp:arguedate
|
- 0001-01-10 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
| dbp:argueyear
| |
| dbp:case
| |
| dbp:courtlistener
| |
| dbp:decidedate
|
- 0001-03-28 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
| dbp:decideyear
| |
| dbp:dissent
| |
| dbp:findlaw
| |
| dbp:float
| |
| dbp:fullname
|
- Harold D. Stump, et al. v. Linda Kay Sparkman and Leo Sparkman (en)
|
| dbp:googlescholar
| |
| dbp:holding
|
- A judge will not be deprived of immunity because the action he took was in error, was done maliciously, or was in excess of his authority. He will be subject to liability only when he has acted in the clear absence of all jurisdiction. (en)
|
| dbp:image
|
- 0001-04-12 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
| dbp:joindissent
| |
| dbp:joinmajority
|
- Burger, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Stevens (en)
|
| dbp:justia
| |
| dbp:lawsapplied
| |
| dbp:litigants
| |
| dbp:loc
| |
| dbp:majority
| |
| dbp:notparticipating
| |
| dbp:openjurist
| |
| dbp:oyez
| |
| dbp:parallelcitations
| |
| dbp:prior
| |
| dbp:subsequent
| |
| dbp:uspage
| |
| dbp:usvol
| |
| dbp:width
| |
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dct:subject
| |
| rdf:type
| |
| rdfs:comment
|
- Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978), is the leading United States Supreme Court decision on judicial immunity. It involved an Indiana judge who was sued by a young woman who had been sterilized without her knowledge as a minor in accordance with the judge's order. The Supreme Court held that the judge was immune from being sued for issuing the order because it was issued as a judicial function. The case has been called one of the most controversial in recent Supreme Court history. (en)
|
| rdfs:label
| |
| owl:sameAs
| |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:depiction
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| foaf:name
|
- (en)
- Harold D. Stump, et al. v. Linda Kay Sparkman and Leo Sparkman (en)
|
| is dbo:wikiPageDisambiguates
of | |
| is dbo:wikiPageRedirects
of | |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |