Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Proof Of Fault In Media Defamation Litigation, Lackland H. Bloom, Jr.
Proof Of Fault In Media Defamation Litigation, Lackland H. Bloom, Jr.
Vanderbilt Law Review
At common law, defamation was a strict liability tort. A defendant could be held liable for publishing a false and defamatory statement absent any evidence that the defendant suspected the statement's falsity or even its defamatory potential, and despite the fact that the defendant used reasonable care in attempting to ascertain the truth. The plaintiff only had to prove fault by the publisher when the plaintiff was attempting to overcome a qualified privilege or establish the liability of a secondary publisher such as a news vendor.' Since the United States Supreme Court's decision in New York Times v. Sullivan, however, …
The Tort Liability Of Investigative Reporters, John W. Wade
The Tort Liability Of Investigative Reporters, John W. Wade
Vanderbilt Law Review
One of the most significant developments in recent years, in both constitutional and tort law, began with the holding in New York Times v. Sullivan that the first amendment places substantial restrictions on the common law tort action for defamation. Although the ramifications of New York Times are still developing,that continuing reform of the law of defamation will result is to be expected. The readjustment of the balancing of conflicting interests that New York Times represents came about at the behest of the press,and the press have been the primary beneficiaries of these developments. Indeed, some commentators contend that the …
State Court Reactions To Gertz V. Robert Welch,Inc.: Inconsistent Results And Reasoning, Charles W. Gerdts, Iii, Kevin J. Wolff
State Court Reactions To Gertz V. Robert Welch,Inc.: Inconsistent Results And Reasoning, Charles W. Gerdts, Iii, Kevin J. Wolff
Vanderbilt Law Review
This Recent Development will examine the state court reactions to Gertz, describe the reasons for the lack of uniformity in their conclusions, and suggest an approach to balancing the first amendment and reputational interests.
Variation On Libel Per Quod, Laurence H. Eldredge
Variation On Libel Per Quod, Laurence H. Eldredge
Vanderbilt Law Review
During the nineteenth century it became settled common law in England and in the United States that in any action for libel, as distinct from slander, the plaintiff could recover damages without pleading or proving that he had in fact suffered any damages as a result of the publication. The American Law Institute accepted this as sound law. Volume III of the Restatement of Torts, published in 1938, stated the rule in section 569: "One who falsely, and without a privilege to do so, publishes matter defamatory to another in such a manner as to make the publication a libel …
Defamation And The Right Of Privacy, John W. Wade, Dean
Defamation And The Right Of Privacy, John W. Wade, Dean
Vanderbilt Law Review
The history of the two torts of defamation and unwarranted invasion of the right of privacy has been greatly different. Defamation developed over a period of many centuries, with the twin torts of libel and slander having completely separate origins and historical growth. Professor Street summarizes this history by declaring that there was "a perversion of evolutionary processes," with the result that there was produced "a rather heterogeneous pile which should normally have gone to form a consistent body of legal doctrine, but which on the contrary, comprises many disconnected fragments moving in a confused way under the impulse of …
Libel Per Se And Special Damages, Alfred H. Knight Iii
Libel Per Se And Special Damages, Alfred H. Knight Iii
Vanderbilt Law Review
Toward the end of the last century a few of the American courts began to express the view that allegation and proof of special damages is necessary in libel actions unless the defamatory meaning of the words is apparent on their face.' Although none of these courts appeared to realize it, this notion was entirely of their own invention. Under the orthodox theory, which went virtually unquestioned in the century preceding these decisions, all written defamation is actionable without proof of special damages, whether it is designated libel per se or libel per quod. Words which are defamatory on their …