Misplaced Pages

Barr v. Matteo

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
1959 United States Supreme Court case
Barr v. Matteo
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued April 20, 1959
Decided June 29, 1959
Full case nameWilliam G. Barr v. Linda Matteo
Citations360 U.S. 564 (more)79 S. Ct. 1335, 3 L.Ed.2d 1434
Case history
PriorBarr v. Matteo, 244 F.2d 767 (D.C. Cir. 1957)
Holding
Petitioner's plea of absolute privilege in defense of the alleged libel must be sustained.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Earl Warren
Associate Justices
Hugo Black · Felix Frankfurter
William O. Douglas · Tom C. Clark
John M. Harlan II · William J. Brennan Jr.
Charles E. Whittaker · Potter Stewart
Case opinions
PluralityHarlan, joined by Frankfurter, Clark, Whittaker
ConcurrenceBlack
DissentWarren, joined by Douglas
DissentBrennan
DissentStewart

Barr v. Matteo, 360 U.S. 564 (1959), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning legal immunity for officers of the executive branch. The Court held that when a federal government official issues a press release or other public statement about an aspect of their official duties, they are absolutely immune from libel suits—at least so long as the libel suit was not authorized by Congress, per Justice Hugo Black, whose concurring opinion provided the decisive fifth vote for immunity. The case originated when John J. Madigan and Linda Matteo, two former employees of the Office of Rent Stabilization, sued acting director William G. Barr over statements he made about them in a press release. In the Supreme Court's plurality opinion for four of five justices in the majority, Justice John Marshall Harlan II said that Barr was immune from being sued over the contents of his press release because his issuance of that press release was within the "outer perimeter" of his official duties. Harlan's opinion further asserted that federal officials "should be free to exercise their duties unembarrassed by the fear of damage suits in respect of acts done in the course of those duties."

References

  1. Sebok, Anthony J. (2005-07-22). "Could Plame sue Rove?". CNN. Retrieved 2024-08-26.
  2. "Barr v. Matteo (1959)". The Free Speech Center. Retrieved 2024-08-26.

External links

Stub icon

This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it.

Categories: