Legal Opinion

Bergman v. Hupy

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 1, 1974No. 208PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRobert W. Hansen, J.

The sole issue here is whether statements made to a district attorney in his official capacity are absolutely or conditionally privileged. If such statements are absolutely privileged, the person making such statements cannot be sued for libel or slander because of them. If such statements are only conditionally privileged, the exemption from responsibility for libel or slander on the ground of privilege extends only to statements made in good faith without malice.

While the distinction between the two is not to be blurred nor abandoned, both privileges, absolute or conditional, seek to…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Kurkierewicz v. CannonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Bromund v. HoltWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Schultz v. StraussWisconsin Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Lisowski v. ChenenoffWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
  5. Barnes v. City of BeloitWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. CRIBERG v. RaymondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
  2. Caldor, Inc. v. BowdenCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  3. McGranahan v. DaharSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1979
  4. Russell v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1981
  5. Converters Equipment Corp. v. Condes Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1977

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API