defense of absolute privilege (Alabama) · Go Syfert
← Alabama issues

defense of absolute privilege in Alabama

5 Alabama opinions name it 1 courts 1974–2012 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Butler v. Town of Argogreen
ala · 2003 · cited in 1 Alabama opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006
2 sentences

2006In 2003, in Butler v. Town of Argo, 871 So.2d 1 (Ala. 2003), this Court noted that "[t]his privilege has been extended to members of local legislative bodies," quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 590 (1977), which provides that "`[a] member of the Congress of the United States or of a State or local legislative body is absolutely privileged to publish defamatory matter concerning another in the performance of his legislative functions.'" 871 So.2d at 24 (emphasis added). "`"To make the defense of absolute privilege available, the communication must be made on a privileged occasion; the cir

2006In 2003, in Butler v. Town of Argo, 871 So.2d 1 (Ala. 2003), this Court noted that "[t]his privilege has been extended to members of local legislative bodies," quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 590 (1977), which provides that "`[a] member of the Congress of the United States or of a State or local legislative body is absolutely privileged to publish defamatory matter concerning another in the performance of his legislative functions.'" 871 So.2d at 24 (emphasis added). "`"To make the defense of absolute privilege available, the communication must be made on a privileged occasion; the cir

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
O'BARR v. Feist green
ala · 1974
2 sentences

2006In 2003, in Butler v. Town of Argo, 871 So.2d 1 (Ala. 2003), this Court noted that "[t]his privilege has been extended to members of local legislative bodies," quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 590 (1977), which provides that "`[a] member of the Congress of the United States or of a State or local legislative body is absolutely privileged to publish defamatory matter concerning another in the performance of his legislative functions.'" 871 So.2d at 24 (emphasis added). "`"To make the defense of absolute privilege available, the communication must be made on a privileged occasion; the cir

2006In 2003, in Butler v. Town of Argo, 871 So.2d 1 (Ala. 2003), this Court noted that "[t]his privilege has been extended to members of local legislative bodies," quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 590 (1977), which provides that "`[a] member of the Congress of the United States or of a State or local legislative body is absolutely privileged to publish defamatory matter concerning another in the performance of his legislative functions.'" 871 So.2d at 24 (emphasis added). "`"To make the defense of absolute privilege available, the communication must be made on a privileged occasion; the cir

22003–2006
Ex Parte Simpson green
ala · 2009
1 sentence

2012Each petition seeks a writ of mandamus (1) directing the trial court to vacate its order of April 16, 2009, denying Simpson’s and the Town’s summary-judgment motions, and (2) ordering it to enter a judgment in favor of the movant.” Simpson I, 36 So.3d at 19-22 .

12012–2012
Brooks v. Solomon Co. green
alnd · 1982
1 sentence

1986Some five years later, in Brooks v. Solomon Co. , 542 F. Supp. 1229 (N.D.Ala. 1982), another case involving an alleged defamatory statement made during a grievance hearing, Judge Propst adopted the Mendicki absolute-privilege line of cases, writing: "The second issue to address is: should the defense of absolute privilege be applied to statements made at such a proceeding [i.e., a grievance committee proceeding]?

11986–1986
Lawson v. Hicks green
· 1862
2 sentences

1974The privilege is a matter of public policy, and is not intended so much for the protection of those engaged in the public service and in the enactment and administration of law, as for the promotion of the public welfare, the purpose being that members of the legislature, judges of courts, jurors, lawyers, and witnesses may speak their minds freely and exercise their respective functions without incurring the risk of a criminal prosecution or an action for the recovery of damages.” In Lawson, supra, at page 285, the court said: “To the catalogue of absolutely privileged communications belong a

1974The privilege is a matter of public policy, and is not intended so much for the protection of those engaged in the public service and in the enactment and administration of law, as for the promotion of the public welfare, the purpose being that members of the legislature, judges of courts, jurors, lawyers, and witnesses may speak their minds freely and exercise their respective functions without incurring the risk of a criminal prosecution or an action for the recovery of damages." In Lawson, supra, at page 285, the court said: "To the catalogue of absolutely privileged communications belong a

11974–1974

Where else courts name it

IL 18 (1978–2019) NY 14 (1957–2013) PA 14 (1961–2017) WA 8 (1966–2025) AL 5 (1974–2012) TX 5 (1984–2019) AZ 4 (1973–1998) CT 4 (1985–2000) OH 4 (1990–1997) SD 3 (1995–2004) MD 3 (1983–2007) KY 3 (1979–2010) UT 3 (2005–2011) IN 2 (2003–2013) FL 2 (1969–1995) LA 2 (2000–2008) OR 2 (2010–2022) NC 2 (2021–2021) VA 2 (1988–1997)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check