Matches in DBpedia 2014 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dennis_v._Sparks> ?p ?o. }
Showing items 1 to 35 of
35
with 100 items per page.
- Dennis_v._Sparks abstract "Dennis v. Sparks, 449 U.S. 24 (1980), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that individuals who bribed a judge for an injunction were not protected by judicial immunity and therefore could be held liable for the damages resulting from the injunction.".
- Dennis_v._Sparks wikiPageExternalLink getcase.pl?court=US&vol=449&invol=24.
- Dennis_v._Sparks wikiPageExternalLink case.html.
- Dennis_v._Sparks wikiPageID "21571400".
- Dennis_v._Sparks wikiPageRevisionID "596650356".
- Dennis_v._Sparks arguedate "--10-08".
- Dennis_v._Sparks argueyear "1980".
- Dennis_v._Sparks decidedate "--11-17".
- Dennis_v._Sparks decideyear "1980".
- Dennis_v._Sparks fullname "Dennis v. Sparks ET AL., DBA Sidney A. Sparks, Trustee".
- Dennis_v._Sparks hasPhotoCollection Dennis_v._Sparks.
- Dennis_v._Sparks holding "The action against the private parties accused of conspiring with the judge is not subject to dismissal. Private persons, jointly engaged with state officials in a challenged action, are acting "under color" of law for purposes of 1983 actions. And the judge's immunity from damages liability for an official act that was allegedly the product of a corrupt conspiracy involving bribery of the judge does not change the character of his action or that of his co-conspirators. Historically at common law, judicial immunity does not insulate from damages liability those private persons who corruptly conspire with a judge. Nor has the doctrine of judicial immunity been considered historically as excusing a judge from responding as a witness when his co-conspirators are sued, even though a charge of conspiracy and judicial corruption will be aired and decided. Gravel v. United States, 408 U.S. 606 , distinguished. The potential harm to the public from denying immunity to co-conspirators if the factfinder mistakenly upholds a charge of a corrupt conspiracy is outweighed by the benefits of providing a remedy [449 U.S. 24, 25] against those private persons who participate in subverting the judicial process and in so doing inflict injury on other persons. pp. 27–32.".
- Dennis_v._Sparks joinmajority "Brennan, Stewart, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens, Burger".
- Dennis_v._Sparks litigants "Dennis v. Sparks".
- Dennis_v._Sparks majority "White".
- Dennis_v._Sparks prior "Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit".
- Dennis_v._Sparks scotus "1975".
- Dennis_v._Sparks uspage "24".
- Dennis_v._Sparks usvol "449".
- Dennis_v._Sparks subject Category:1980_in_United_States_case_law.
- Dennis_v._Sparks subject Category:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases.
- Dennis_v._Sparks type Case.
- Dennis_v._Sparks type LegalCase.
- Dennis_v._Sparks type SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase.
- Dennis_v._Sparks type UnitOfWork.
- Dennis_v._Sparks type Event.
- Dennis_v._Sparks type Situation.
- Dennis_v._Sparks comment "Dennis v. Sparks, 449 U.S. 24 (1980), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that individuals who bribed a judge for an injunction were not protected by judicial immunity and therefore could be held liable for the damages resulting from the injunction.".
- Dennis_v._Sparks label "Dennis v. Sparks".
- Dennis_v._Sparks sameAs m.05h3n6t.
- Dennis_v._Sparks sameAs Q5259106.
- Dennis_v._Sparks sameAs Q5259106.
- Dennis_v._Sparks wasDerivedFrom Dennis_v._Sparks?oldid=596650356.
- Dennis_v._Sparks isPrimaryTopicOf Dennis_v._Sparks.
- Dennis_v._Sparks name "Dennis v. Sparks ET AL., DBA Sidney A. Sparks, Trustee".