Johnson v. Sawyer

120 F.3d 1307 (1997)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Johnson v. Sawyer

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
120 F.3d 1307 (1997)

Facts

Elvis Johnson (plaintiff) was a vice president and director of the American National Insurance Company (ANICO). On April 10, Johnson pleaded guilty to a criminal information for underpaying his 1975 taxes. Per Johnson, ANICO’s president, Orson Clay, said that Johnson could keep his ANICO positions if ANICO was not embarrassed by publicity about Johnson’s plea. Assistant United States Attorney James Powers worked with Johnson’s attorney to minimize publicity by providing a fictitious home address for Johnson on a court document. The plea documents filed with the court did not mention Johnson’s ANICO employment, but the judge referred to ANICO at the plea hearing. On April 13, Sally Sassen (defendant), an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) employee, prepared and issued a press release regarding Johnson’s plea; the release included Johnson’s age, middle initial, home address, and his position as ANICO’s vice president. Sassen prepared the relevant portion of the release solely from information she received from IRS agent Robert Stone (defendant). Stone, who did not attend Johnson’s plea hearing or review the relevant court filings or docket, learned about the case from Powers. Upon receiving a complaint from Johnson’s attorney, the IRS engaged in internal discussions involving supervisors Dale Braun and Robert Sawyer (defendants), leading to an April 16 revised release that also mentioned Johnson’s age, middle initial, home address, and ANICO affiliation and position. Soon thereafter, at Clay’s request, Johnson resigned his executive and board positions. Johnson sued Sawyer, Braun, Sassen, and other IRS employees (collectively, IRS employees) (defendants) for disclosing his tax-return information in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 6103. The jury awarded Johnson approximately $9 million in damages. The IRS employees appealed, arguing that § 6103 protected only confidential information and that Johnson’s ANICO employment was not confidential because the judge mentioned it at the plea hearing. The IRA employees also argued that Johnson’s middle initial was not confidential because it appeared on the court’s docket. However, the IRS employees conceded that Johnson’s age, home address, and his vice president position were not in the court record and thus were wrongfully disclosed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Barksdale, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 791,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 791,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 791,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership