Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, however, radically changed the nature of libel law in the United States by establishing that public officials could win a suit for libel only when they could prove the media outlet in question knew either that the information was wholly and patently false or that it was published "with reckless ...
William O. Douglas, on the other hand, felt that libel laws were too strict even as it was, and that leaving liability standards for private figures up to the states was too capricious: This of course leaves the simple negligence standard as an option with the jury free to impose damages upon a finding that the publisher failed to act as "a ...
He named in his suit Lipstadt and Penguin Books, whose Plume division had published a British edition of her book. [7] [12] Irving also sued Holocaust historian Gitta Sereny for libel for an article she had written about him entitled "Spin Time for Hitler" in The Observer newspaper on 21 April 1996, although the case did not go to court.
In procedural dispute, judge penalizes Republican lawmaker $240 as his suit proceeds against Erie Reader, Democrat Jim Wertz over Trump-related piece. As Sen. Laughlin presses libel suit, judge ...
A broadcaster sued for defamation by Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax after airing interviews from two women accusing him of sexual assault said in court papers that his lawsuit is an attempt to ...
The lawsuit, filed Monday, centers on a May 2022 column Gleason wrote for Bleeding Heartland about an April 2022 meeting of a Pleasant Valley School District committee debating whether to remove ...
Carol Burnett v. National Enquirer, Inc. was a decision by the California Court of Appeal, which ruled that the "actual malice" required under California law for imposition of punitive damages is distinct from the "actual malice" required by New York Times Co. v. Sullivan to be liable for defaming a "public figure", and that the National Enquirer is not a "newspaper" for the purposes of ...
The 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan dramatically altered the nature of libel law in the country by elevating the fault element for public officials to actual malice – that is, public figures could win a libel suit only if they could demonstrate the publisher's "knowledge that the information was false" or that the information was ...