Torts Commons^™

Media Lability For Libel Of Newsworthy Persons: Before And After Time, Inc. V. Firestone, Thomas E. Wheeler, Jr.

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Revitalizing The Clear-And-Present-Danger Test: Toward A Principled Interpretation Of The First Amendment, Jeffrey M. Shaman

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Tort Liability Of A University For Libelous Material In Student Publications, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

While attention will occasionally be drawn to the impact of the New York Times privilege, this Note largely assumes that a defamed plaintiff is capable of overcoming the constitutional barriers imposed by New York Times and its progeny. In other words, the assumption is made that libelous statements either fall outside the constitutional privilege or that the plaintiff can demonstrate actual malice in the student authors or editors. The Note will analyze the traditional theories which may be invoked to establish the university's liability for defamatory material in student publications. First, a range of student newspaper-university relationships will be examined …

Torts: 1971 Survey Of New York Law, Faust F. Rossi, Warren E. George

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

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 …

Some Implications Of The Constitutional Privilege To Defame, Robert E. Keeton

Vanderbilt Law Review

In this issue of the Vanderbilt Law Review we honor an extraordinary scholar, teacher, and Dean. It is a happy circumstance that the editors have offered us this opportunity at a time when we can confidently predict that Dean Wade will continue to serve us with great distinction in years ahead. The present article concerns some pending problems in the law of defamation that have already attracted Dean Wade's active interest. This seems a particularly fitting subject for inclusion in a symposium celebrating not only his distinguished past service but also a commencement incident to his release from decanal responsibility.

Libel Per Quod In Florida, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The purpose of this article is to trace the development of the rules of defamation with particular reference to extrinsic fact. A defamatory communication is one that tends to diminish the esteem, respect, good will, or confidence in which a person is held or to excite adverse, derogatory, or unpleasant feelings or opinions against him. To be actionable under the modem law, however, the defendant's statement must be capable of a defamatory meaning in the sense normally understood.

Defamation consists of the separate torts of libel and slander. Historically, these torts evolved independently of each other, and as a result …

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.

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.

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 …

Extension Of The Sullivan Rule To Non-Official Public Figures, Anon

Washington Law Review

On two separate occasions, Dr. Linus Pauling sued news services for libel. In one case, involving a magazine which had identified Dr. Pauling as a communist without proof of the accusation, his libel action was dismissed by a New York court. In the second case, an editorial in defendant's newspaper falsely reported that Dr. Pauling had been cited for contempt of Congress. He had failed to comply with a congressional demand for a list of associates who had aided him in circulating a petition against nuclear testing, but was never actually cited for contempt. A federal district court's verdict for …

Extension Of The Sullivan Rule To Non-Official Public Figures, Anon

Washington Law Review

On two separate occasions, Dr. Linus Pauling sued news services for libel. In one case, involving a magazine which had identified Dr. Pauling as a communist without proof of the accusation, his libel action was dismissed by a New York court. In the second case, an editorial in defendant's newspaper falsely reported that Dr. Pauling had been cited for contempt of Congress. He had failed to comply with a congressional demand for a list of associates who had aided him in circulating a petition against nuclear testing, but was never actually cited for contempt. A federal district court's verdict for …

Fair Comment - The Extent Of The Public Interest Element - Afro-American Publishing Co. V. Jaffe

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Defamation Of Corporations, Louis J. Bloomfield

Cleveland State Law Review

Since the sixteenth century courts of law have held that an individual may bring an action for damages for libel or slander. When corporations came into their own, occasions arose where the question of a corporation's right to bring suit for libel or slander had to be decided. The first cases centered discussion on whether a corporation could sue on the basis of similarity to a natural person (an individual) or to an artificial person (an entity). While courts long have made a distinction between the artificial and the natural person, the law has been established that, like an individual, …

Libel From Comment On Facts Generally Known - A. S. Abell Company V. Kirby, Robert W. Baker

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Torts-Libel-Constitutionality Of Retraction Statute Eliminating General Damages Recovery, John W. Galanis

Michigan Law Review

Following publication of allegedly libelous statements made by defendants during a televised news broadcast, plaintiff commenced an action to recover damages. Defendants' motion to strike the allegations of general and punitive damages was granted by the trial court since the complaint did not allege that defendants intended to defame plaintiff, or that defendants refused to publish a requested retraction of a non-intentional libel, both of which are conditions precedent to recovery of such damages under the Oregon statute. Plaintiff failed to plead further and judgment was entered for defendants. On appeal to the Oregon Supreme Court, held, affirmed. The …

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 …

Torts - Libel And Slander - Effect Of An Unsustained Plea Of Truth, Frank D. Jacobs

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, superintendent of a state training school for boys, was removed from that office by his superior in the state department of social welfare. The defendant corporation, publisher and owner of two newspapers in the state, published certain articles in its newspapers relating to plaintiff's conduct in office, his management of the school, and his removal from office. Plaintiff brought action of libel. Defendant, in addition to a plea of general issue, filed a plea of truth. The trial court instructed the jury that where truth is pleaded as a defense, but is not successful, such plea will sustain an …

Torts - Libel And Slander - Calling A Person A Communist As Slader Per Se, Ross Kipka S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

In an action for slander, plaintiff alleged that on three separate occasions defendant had orally called or referred to plaintiff as a communist. The court rendered judgment against the defendant, holding that calling a person a communist is slander per se. On appeal, held, affirmed. Since membership in the Communist Party is a felony under Pennsylvania statute, falsely referring to a person as being a communist is slander per se. Solosko v. Paxton, (Pa. 1956) 119 A. (2d) 230.

Newspaper Libel, Marcus D. Gleisser

Cleveland State Law Review

Cases to be cited below in this article will show that libel's line of danger in many instances is vague even to legal experts with specialized training and ample time for research and meditation. For journalists in their ceaseless race against time, and harried by competition, perforce relying on many sources for valuable information, the phantom of libel can be most troublesome.

The Effect Of A Plea Of Justification In A Libel Suit - Domchick V. Greenbelt Consumer Services

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Book Reviews, William N. Ethridge, Jr., M. G. Dakin (Reviewer), A. B. Neil (Reviewer), C. M. Updegraff (Reviewer)

Vanderbilt Law Review

Book Reviews

The Roosevelt Court: A Study in Judicial Politics and Values By C.Herman Pritchett New York: The Macmillan Company, 1948, Pp. 314,$5.00

Lions Under the Throne By Charles P. Curtis, Jr. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 1947. Pp. 361. $3.50

The Nine Young Men By Wesley McCune New York: Harper & Bros.,1947. Pp. 293. $3.50

reviewer: William N. Ethridge, Jr.

==========================

A Declaration of Legal Faith By Wiley Rutledge Lawrence, Kansas:University of Kansas Press, 1947. Pp. 82. $2.00

reviewer: M. G. Dakin

The Papers of Walter Clark: 1857-1901, Vol. 1 Edited by Aubrey Lee Brooks and Hugh T. Leffler Chapel …

Gavit And Mann Of I.U. Sue Publishing Company

Bernard Campbell Gavit (1933-1951)

No abstract provided.

Libel And Slander - Charging Physician With Lack Of Skill In Particular Case, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, a practicing physician, sued to recover damages for an alleged libel committed when defendant falsely published in its newspaper an article stating that plaintiff examined a prisoner in the city jail, diagnosed his condition as "alcoholic paralysis," and ordered his removal to a city hospital, and that a post mortem disclosed that the prisoner's neck was fractured. Held, that to charge a physician with having made a wrong diagnosis in a particular case is not actionable per se, and since there is no allegation of special damage, there can be no recovery. Blende v. Hearst Publications, Inc., …

Trusts-Liability Of Trust Estate For Torts Of Trustee

Michigan Law Review

Defendants, trustees of land which had been leased for years to plaintiff, demanded that plaintiff stop removing crops from the land until the past-due rent was paid. Such a removal of crops was a criminal offense by South Carolina statute. In a suit for libel against the defendants in their representative capacity, held, defendants' demurrer sustained. Ross v. Moses, 175 S. C. 355, 179 S. E. 757 (1935).

Torts--Libel Per Se, Byron Pumphrey

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Husband And Wife--Actions--Tort Of Husband Affecting Wife's Property

Michigan Law Review

The recent case of Ralston v. Ralston presents the question: What kind of conduct on the part of the husband will be construed as a tort to the wife's separate property so as to entitle her to sue her husband? In that case the parties were living apart under a deed of separation, executed in 1899. The alleged defamatory words, the action being libel, were contained in an inscription (referring to another woman) on a tombstone, erected by the defendant husband, which read: "In loving memory of Jennie, the dearly beloved wife of W. R. C. Ralston . . . …

Husband And Wife-Torts-Action By Wife Against Husband For Libel

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Libel And Slander-Liability Of A Telegraph Company For The Transmission Of A Defamatory Message

Michigan Law Review

It is surprising that despite the tremendous number of messages handled, covering almost every conceivable subject, the question of the liability of a telegraph company for the transmission of a defamatory message has arisen in but half a dozen jurisdictions. The earliest reported case, decided in 1858 when the law as to the tort liability of a corporation was still in the formative period, asserted the liability of the telegraph company on the sole ground that a corporation could be guilty of malice. Following a series of cases arising in the state and federal courts of Minnesota, a modern rule …

Recent Important Decisions

Michigan Law Review

A collection of recent important court decisions.