Stump v. Sparkman | |
---|---|
Argued January 10, 1978 Decided March 28, 1978 | |
Full case name | Harold D. Stump, et al. v. Linda Kay Sparkman and Leo Sparkman |
Citations | 435 U.S. 349 (more) 98 S. Ct. 1099; 55 L. Ed. 2d 331; 1978 U.S. LEXIS 74 |
Case history | |
Prior | Civ.No. F-75-129 (N.D. Ind. May 13, 1976) Certiorari granted October 3, 1977, 434 U.S. 815, 98 S.Ct. 51, 54 L.Ed.2d 70 |
Subsequent | Rehearing Denied June 5, 1978, 436 U.S. 951, 98 S.Ct. 2862, 56 L.Ed.2d 795 Remand 601 F.2nd 261 (7th Cir. 1979) |
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. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | White, joined by Burger, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Stevens |
Dissent | Stewart, joined by Marshall, Powell |
Dissent | Powell |
Brennan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
Laws applied | |
42 U.S.C. § 1983 |
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.[1]
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(help)