Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Nixon V. Fitzgerald: Recognition Of Absolute Immunity From Personal Damage Liability For Presidential Acts, Craig B. Forry Feb 2013

Nixon V. Fitzgerald: Recognition Of Absolute Immunity From Personal Damage Liability For Presidential Acts, Craig B. Forry

Pepperdine Law Review

Although traditionally it has been recognized that the President is absolutely immune from personal damage liability for his official acts, there is no precedent for this rule in constitutional text or case law. However, in the case of Nixon v. Fitzgerald, the Supreme Court overruled lower federal courts in establishing a clear precedent for the President's absolute immunity from personal liability for civil damages. The author examines this decision in light of traditional principles of official immunity and analyzes the Court's holding from the standpoint of whether the President is indeed placed "above the law."


Abrogating The Witness Immunity Rule: How Fast? How Far?, Robert Currie Jan 2013

Abrogating The Witness Immunity Rule: How Fast? How Far?, Robert Currie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This article examines the current state of the witness immunity rule in Canada (i.e. the rule that individuals, especially experts, are immune from tort actions which might arise from their participation in court proceedings). In light of the UK Supreme Court's modification of the rule in Jones v. Kaney (2011), some proposals are made for restricting the scope of the rule and thus allowing meritorious litigation to proceed in spite of it.