Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

Federal agents when charged with duties which require the exercise of discretion are immune from liability for actions within the scope of their authority. Ordinarily enforcement agents charged with the duty of arrest are not so immune. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bur. of Narc., 456 F.2d 1339 (2d Cir. 1972). Even where an absolute privilege has been denied police officers charged with false arrest, good faith and reasonable belief in the validity of the arrest is an affirmative defense. See Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 555-57, 18 L. Ed. 2d 288, 87 S. Ct. 1213 (1967) (§ 1983 action); Bivens, supra, 456 F.2d at 1341, 1348; Boyd v. Huffman, 342 F. Supp. 787, 789 (N.D. Ohio, W.D. 1972). If an officer is acting within his role as a government officer his conduct is at least within the outer perimeter of his authority. Bivens, supra, 456 F.2d at 1345.

Bivens suggests that so long as the officer is acting in his role as a government agent he is acting within the 'outer perimeter of his line of duty.' Bivens, supra, 456 F.2d at 1348. Compare Spalding v. Vilas, 161 U.S. ...

Register or login to access full content