Bol v. Cole

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that the state trooper in Carradine was entitled to absolute immunity “because of the critical governmental interest involved”
• “Affording psychologists an absolute privilege with respect to statements contained in patient records concerning third parties ... would increase the risk of publication to inappropriate persons.”
• explaining that the immunity provision is intended to immunize those making reports under subdivision 3 and concluding that because there is no provision in subdivision 3 for sharing a report with a parent of a victim of abuse, immunity does not apply in such a case
• trial court did not err in granting summary judgment where evidence of malice was insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact
• “For absolute privilege to apply, the public interest served must be one of paramount importance, such that it is entitled to protection even at the expense of failing to compensate harm to the defamed person’s reputation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).