actual malice public figure

• Lansky v. Rizzo, (Ohio 2007)

Defamation; public figure; actual malice conspiracy.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• A Confidentiality Catch-22?

The court determined that because Berman and the Post exercised their rights under the New York shield statute to refuse to reveal the sources, they could "not rely on the confidential sources to show that they did not act with actual malice in publishing the article," the court said, referring to the legal standard a public figure such as Sprewell must meet to collect damages in a libel suit. In these states, the law either specifically prevents a reporter from claiming the privilege in a defamation case or significantly weakens the privilege.\n A trial court judge wrote that since Thomas' "whole case rests on the state of mind of Mr. Page when he published the offending articles" and because Page's "state of mind is totally dependent on who his sources are and what they told him, and...

• News Media and the Law
• Vol. 31 Nbr. 2, April 2007

• Daubenmire v. Sommers, (Ohio 2004)

Defamation; coach; limited purpose; public figure; actual; malice; qualified; privilege; R.C. 2305.11(A).

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Chilling Free Speech

Actual malice" requires a plaintiff to prove that a defendant published allegedly libelous statements about a public official or public figure knowing they were false or with reckless disregard for the truth But these free speech protections apply only on American soil, which means they cannot be used against the latest wave of libel litigants who bring suits overseas - such as foreigners accused of terrorism ties. Foreign libel litigants' suits against American journalists who write about terror send an unmistakable message to other writers and publishers that scrutinizing the activities of that litigant, and others of similar wealth and combativeness, is a perilous legal, professional and financial course, said a legal brief signed by a coalition of media organizations in support of...

• Quill, The
• Vol. 96 Nbr. 7, September 2008

• Great Lakes Capital Partners Ltd. v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co., (Ohio 2008)

SUMMARY JUDGMENT; STANDARD OF REVIEW; DEFAMATION; PUBLIC FIGURE VS. PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL; LIMITED PURPOSE PUBLIC FIGURE; ACTUAL MALICE; STATEMENTS NOT CONCERNING THE PLAINTIFF; TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Murray v. Knight-Ridder, Inc., (Ohio 2004)

Summary judgment; Defamation; Per se v. per quod; Statement indicating appellant death immenient was defamation per se as it adversely affects his business; Innocent construction rule; Inapplicable to defamation per se; Remaining statements that appellant is a liar also are defamation per se when taken in conjunction with each other; Substantial truth; Regardless of whether a statement is per se or per quod defamation if it is substantially true it is not actionable as a matter of law; Disputes as to whether statements were substantially true as such it is a jury question; Actual malice; Limited purpose public figure; Of and concerning; Appellant is the company, a reasonable jury could conclude this; Opinion, the way and where the statement was published, in an investigative piece, show...

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Scientist Loses Suit Over Link to Anthrax Attacks

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) -- A federal appeals court has ruled against a former Army scientist who sued The New York Times over columns linking him to deadly 2001 anthrax attacks. A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Monday that Steven Hatfill was a public figure and had to prove actual malice to win his libel lawsuit. The court said Hatfill failed to meet that burden.

• Deseret News (Salt Lake City)
• July 15, 2008

• Scaccia v. Dayton Newspapers, Inc., (Ohio 2007)

Trial court abused its discretion when it failed to grant Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery in order to prove their defamation claims; trial court did not err when it held that the actual malice standard applies to the claim of Plaintiff, John Scaccia, who is a public figure with respect to the matters the Defendants’ published reports concern; actual malice standard does not likewise apply to the defamation claims of Cynthia Scaccia, who is not a public figure by marriage, and the trial court erred in so holding. Reversed, in part, and remanded.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Names in the News

A federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., has ruled against a former Army scientist who sued The New York Times over columns linking him to deadly 2001 anthrax attacks. A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Monday that Steven Hatfill was a public figure and had to prove actual malice to win his libel lawsuit. The court said Hatfill failed to meet that burden.

• The Commercial Appeal (2007-Current)
• July 15, 2008

• Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton, 491 U.S. 657 (1989)

... reputation, and had been published with actual malice. After listening to six days of testimony a... instructions defining the elements of public figure libel and directed to answer three special ...

• U.S. Supreme Court