Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Though the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was designed to protect freedom of the press, for most of the history of the United States, the U.S. Supreme Court failed to use it to rule on libel cases. This left libel laws, based upon the traditional "Common Law" of defamation inherited from the English legal system, mixed across the states.
The crime of scandalum magnatum (insulting the peers of the realm through slander or libel) [6] was established by the Statute of Westminster 1275, c. 34, [7] but the first instance of criminal libel is generally agreed to be the De Libellis Famosis case, [8] tried in the Star Chamber in the reign of James I by Edward Coke who, in his judgement ...
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court establishing the standard of First Amendment protection against defamation claims brought by private individuals.
The Associated Press estimates that 95% of libel cases involving news stories do not arise from high-profile news stories, but "run of the mill" local stories like news coverage of local criminal investigations or trials, or business profiles. [62] An early example of libel is the case of John Peter Zenger in 1735.
The Court analogized Alabama's libel law to the infamous Alien and Sedition Acts passed in the late 1790s during the presidency of John Adams. [17] It reasoned that a broad interpretation of libel laws that protected government officials from criticism would produce situations similar to those under the Alien and Sedition Acts, which had been ...
Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case that rejected the argument that a separate opinion privilege existed against libel. [1] It was seen by legal commentators as the end of an era that began with New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and continued with Gertz v.
Gibson's Bakery filed their own appeal days later asking for review of Ohio's statutory caps on monetary damages. Gibson's argued that statutory limits on monetary damages were unconstitutional for libel and slander cases. It also appealed the trial court's decision to exclude Maggiore's expert testimony. [34]