Carr v. Watkins

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that if the qualified immunity enjoyed by the defendant federal officer immunized him from liability for defamation, it also immunized him from liability for the other alleged torts
• observing that “if there was immunity from liability for defamation, there was immunity from liability for the other alleged torts” of invasion of privacy and malicious interference with contract rights
• observing that “if there was immunity from liability for defamation, there was immunity from liability for the other alleged torts” of invasion of privacy and malicious interference with contract rights
• Distinguishing, for purposes of defamation actions, the broad immunity enjoyed by federal officials under federal law, from the limited immunity granted to Maryland officials under Maryland law
• recognizing invasion of privacy as an independent tort
• recognizing invasion of privacy as an independent tort

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).