Law Commons^™

The Defamation Injunction Meets The Prior Restraint Doctrine, Doug Rendleman

San Diego Law Review

This article maintains that, under defined circumstances, a judge should be able to grant an injunction that forbids the defendant’s proved defamation. It analyzes the common law of defamation, the constitutional prior restraint doctrine, the constitutional protection for defamation that stems from New York Times v. Sullivan, and injunctions and their enforcement.

In Near v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court expanded protection for expression by adding an injunction to executive licensing as a prior restraint. Although the Near court circumscribed the injunction as a prior restraint, it approved criminal sanctions and damages judgment for defamation. An injunction that forbids the defendant’s …

Ubi Jus, Ibi Remedium: The Fundamental Right To A Remedy Under Due Process, Tracy A. Thomas

San Diego Law Review

This essay is part of the 2003 Remedies Forum symposium comprised of international remedies scholars addressing the topic of equitable relief in the fifty years since Brown v. Board of Education. It may be true as other scholars have argued that since the time of Brown, institutional defendants have won at the expense of plaintiffs. Defendants have learned that delay and defiance work. The U.S. Supreme Court has adopted a standard for ordering equitable relief that significantly defers to defendant wrongdoers at the plaintiffs' expense. Epithets of activist courts and judicial legislation have colored the existing scholarship and portrayed remedial …

Central Pathology Service Medical Clinic, Inc. V. Superior Court: Statute Limiting Punitive Damages For The Professional Negligence Of Health Care Providers Includes Intentional Torts, Russell A. Gold

San Diego Law Review

In the 1992 decision of Central Pathology Service Medical Clinic, Inc. v. Superior Court the California Supreme Court held that every plaintiff injured by a health care provider must comply with section 452.13 of the California Civil Procedure Code, provided the injuries are directly related to the provision of professional services. Section 452.13 requires a pretrial determination of whether a punitive damage claim has a substantial probability of prevailing. This statute also applies to intentional torts, in which the plaintiff is injured by treatment to which the plaintiff did not consent. This Casenote analyzes whether additional procedural obstacles are warranted …