Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
School Principals And New York Times: Ohio's Narrow Reading Of Who Is A Public Official Or Public Figure, Andrew L. Turscak Jr.
School Principals And New York Times: Ohio's Narrow Reading Of Who Is A Public Official Or Public Figure, Andrew L. Turscak Jr.
Cleveland State Law Review
The United States Supreme Court has promulgated the rule that plaintiffs in defamation cases who are either public officials or public figures must prove that an alleged defamatory statement was made with "actual malice."' Those individuals who have achieved public official or public figure status have a higher burden of proof than ordinary plaintiffs; they must show that a defamatory falsehood was made "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." The Supreme Court has not listed which government employees qualify for public official status, but it has provided some guidance. …
Alienation Of Affection And Defamation: Similar Interests - Dissimilar Treatment, Richard G. Zeiger
Alienation Of Affection And Defamation: Similar Interests - Dissimilar Treatment, Richard G. Zeiger
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note will discuss the historical development of the actions of alienation of affection and defamation of character in an effort to determine why they have been accorded dissimilar treatment, and whether such treatment is justified. Consideration will be given to the individual and societal interests which each action serves. The effect of changing social policies on these actions throughout history will be examined. Finally, suggestions will be made concerning the future treatment of the alienation of affection action.
Libelous Ridicule By Journalists, James M. Naughton, Eric R. Gilbertson
Libelous Ridicule By Journalists, James M. Naughton, Eric R. Gilbertson
Cleveland State Law Review
Proof of actual malice, or even establishing that an attack in ridicule bears no relation to public conduct, seems at best, extremely difficult to bring out. The public interest in protecting itself, through criticism of those in prominence, weighs much more heavily on the scales of justice than does the interest of public figures in protecting themselves from personal attack. So go ahead and draw your cartoons, Conrad. Keep sticking pins in the kewpie dolls of America, Art Buchwald. And tell it like it is, Pogo.
Master's Defamation Of His Servant, Charles A. Caruso
Master's Defamation Of His Servant, Charles A. Caruso
Cleveland State Law Review
The question now arises, as it does so frequently when one right must be held in balance against another, is one's right to unconditionally utter any statement he so wishes subservient to another's right to a reputation free from the impairments of defamation? The question has lost its youth along with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution; yet the decisions and authority, as to which right is the more fundamental and which should be subrogated to which, are still widely divided.
How Far May Newspapers Go In Criticizing, Richard Szilagyi
How Far May Newspapers Go In Criticizing, Richard Szilagyi
Cleveland State Law Review
Any written or printed article which is false and is conveyed by publication to third parties is defamatory or "libelous." That is, it is actionable if it tends to subject the plaintiff to hatred, scorn, ridicule, public contempt or disgrace; or if it induces a substantial number of respectable community members to avoid, shun, or deprive him of their friendly association, even though the defamation imputes no moral turpitude to him. Despite a long history of judicial decisions and numerous discussions and writings by the legal profession, there are few areas of the law so unsettled as the law of …
Defamation Privilege In Internal Affairs Of Religious Societies, Howard A. Shelley Jr.
Defamation Privilege In Internal Affairs Of Religious Societies, Howard A. Shelley Jr.
Cleveland State Law Review
Defamation privilege in religious societies is burdened in interpretation by the strong doctrine of separation of church and state coupled with the courts' reluctance to become involved in the internal affairs of private associations. That over the years this has resulted in establishment of a philosophy regarding defamation privilege in church controversies broader in scope than that available even to other private associations is apparent.
The Problem Of Group Defamation, Tom C. Clark
The Problem Of Group Defamation, Tom C. Clark
Cleveland State Law Review
It is my hope that the work of this symposium will contribute much to an understanding of the problems of group libel. But we cannot expect the judicial process to control such utterances. Heads get too hot and evil is too rampant. The final control must await the elimination of the three I's of this evil: Intolerance, Ignorance and Ignobility. They can be destroyed. They are not the inevitable results of increased social intercourse. They are not inherited- they are acquired. They cannot be legislated or decreed into the hearts and minds of men. It is for us- in the …
Group Defamation In The U. S. A., James Jay Brown, Carl L. Stern
Group Defamation In The U. S. A., James Jay Brown, Carl L. Stern
Cleveland State Law Review
The difficulties faced by the group defamation victim are obvious on paper and terrifying in reality. In merely defending his reputation, he is confronted by unprovable issues and, as will be pointed out, is bludgeoned in court by a history of "rational-reasonable" civil and criminal precedents. A brief outline of this paradox is set out here, but the question still remains whether the civil-common law or our legislatures have an answer to this unbelievable legal .
Group Defamation In France, Jean Peytel
Group Defamation In France, Jean Peytel
Cleveland State Law Review
It cannot be said that there is any French legislation which specifically protects citizens of any particular ethnic origin or creed. For instance, there is no law that shelters members of a particular religious faith from group defamation. The absence of legislative texts in this connection is explicable by the tradition rooted in the French psyche, born out of the French Revolution, that frowns upon racial discrimination and religious intolerance.
Syposium Conclusion, Pieter J. Hoets
Syposium Conclusion, Pieter J. Hoets
Cleveland State Law Review
Tort liability, based on modern medical understanding of the very real injury to an individual member of a defamed group, probably is the readiest and best preventive of abuse of the right of free speech until sound legislation is adopted. But we need both criminal and civil law. In the last analysis all legislation deals with morality-legislates morality. The law serves not only to regulate but also to educate, elevate, and dignify. It must deal with group defamation now. We must have law that will protect us from the sick and evil souls who poison our society with hatreds.
Clergymen's Interference With Private Rights, Robert B. Dunsmore
Clergymen's Interference With Private Rights, Robert B. Dunsmore
Cleveland State Law Review
If a clergyman is to be granted complete immunity to say whatever he believes, or to take any action which he believes best for his church or his congregation, then eventually either our concept of separation of church and state will be destroyed or else by the very weight of the immunities and the inequities resulting therefrom the qualified privilege of the clergyman will be destroyed. The real question is not whether such a privilege exists or should exist, but at what point does the interference with the rights of the individual become so great as to be actionable. This …