Document: 387 U.S. 82 87 S.Ct. 1425 18 L.Ed.2d 577 James A. DOMBROWSKI et al., Petitioners,v.James EASTLAND al. No. 118. Argued Feb. 20, 1967. Decided May 15, Arthur Kinoy, New York City, for petitioners. Roger Robb, Washington, D.C., respondents. PER CURIAM. 1 The Court of Appeals the District Columbia Circuit sustained order granting summary judgment to respondents who are, respectively, Chairman and counsel Internal Security Subcommittee Judiciary Committee United States Senate. Petitioners' claim is essentially that tortiously entered into participated in a conspiracy concert action with Louisiana officials seize property records petitioners by unlawful means violation petitioners' Fourth Amendment rights. circumstances searches arrests involved are set forth Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 479, 85 1116, 14 22 (1965), Judge Wisdom's dissenting opinion case, 227 F.Supp. 556, 573 (D.C.E.D.La.1964). courts held illegal because warrants secured police had not been supported showing probable cause. In civil suit these same against allegedly conspiracy, Fifth Circuit, reversing favor third-party defendants, plaintiffs raised genuine issue material fact whether 'and other members (State) committee were 'acting sphere legitimate legislative activity', which would entitle them immunity.' Pfister Arceneaux, C.A.5th Cir., Nov. 14, 1966, 376 F.2d 821. 2 present court below recognized 'considerable difficulty' reaching conclusion that, on basis affidavits parties, there no disputed issues respect claim. It nevertheless upheld dismissal ground 'the record before contained unchallenged facts nature scope sufficient give (respondents) an immunity answerability damages * *.' support this addressed itself only part claims related take-over after 'raids.' As this, it subject matter seized was within jurisdiction Seat e issuance subpoenas obtain validated subsequent ratification. On basis, acts seek relief privileged, citing Tenney Brandhove, 341 367, 71 783, 95 L.Ed. 1019 (1951). 3 did specifically comment upon contention shows dispute as their respondent Sourwine actively collaborated making plans 'raids' pursuant claimed authority its behalf, absense factual refinement can occur result trial, we need and, indeed, could express legal consequences such collaboration, if occurred. 4 There controverted evidence record, date appearing certain documents respondents' disputes typographical error, affords more than merely colorable substance assertions Sourwine. We make standing alone be verdict Sourwine, or require his favor. But believe employee committee, go trial. Eastland, agree lower complaint must dismissed. does contain involvement any activity liability. purpose office doctrine immunity, having roots Speech Debate Clause Constitution, Kilbourn Thompson, 103 168, 204, 26 377 (1881), legislators engaged 'in supra, U.S., at 376, S.Ct., 788, should protected from litigation's results but also burden defending themselves. This has held, however, less absolute, although applicable, when applied officers employees body, rather said doctrine, legislator, 'deserves greater where official acting behalf legislature sued *.'* (341 378, 789) Cf. Wheeldin Wheeler, 373 647, 83 1441, 10 605 (1963). light principle, compelled hold reversal him. 5 Accordingly, affirm Eastland reverse remand further proceedings accordance opinion. 6 Mr. Justice BLACK took consideration decision case. 7 Partly affirmed partly reversed remanded. pointed out Tenney, supra (per Frankfurter, J.), 'allowed Sergeant-at-Arms, found one defendant House.' 789.

Category: 2