Esposito v. SFX
1. What is the most “jealously” protected kind of speech, according to the court in this case? (3 points)
“The most jealously protected speech is that which advances the free, uninhibited flow of ideas and opinions on matters of public interest and concern. That which is addressed to matters of private concern, or focuses upon persons who are not "public figures" is less stringently protected.” (Taken from LexisNexis, Esposito v SFX case)
2. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points)
Supreme Court of New York in 1996 & the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division in 1997
3. Briefly – state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points)
Mrs. Esposito’s bridal photo was published in a newspaper alongside other brides. The SFX radio station disc jockey’s, during one of their aired segments called “The ugliest bride contest” discussed Esposito’s photo commenting on how she looked and other factors that would qualify her for the winner of the “ugliest bride.” The radio also opened the floors for other to vote on the photos as well. The disc jockeys announced Esposito’s full name over the radio and her superiors’ names. Esposito heard the comments along with her coworkers. Esposito sought out for emotional distress and was deemed to receive compensation. SFX then appealed the decision where they lost again.
4. According to the case, why was this not defamation, and what tort did the court approve a filing for? (5 points)
“A statement is defamatory if it tends to expose the plaintiff to public hatred, contempt, ridicule or disgrace--that is, if it would tend to lead the average person in the community to form an evil or bad opinion of the plaintiff.” (Taken from LexisNexis, Esposito v SFX case)
“The tort of ‘intentional infliction of emotional distress’ is defined in PJI 3:6 (1997 Supp) as follows: ‘One who (intentionally and for the purpose of causing severe emotional distress, recklessly 2 )
“The most jealously protected speech is that which advances the free, uninhibited flow of ideas and opinions on matters of public interest and concern. That which is addressed to matters of private concern, or focuses upon persons who are not "public figures" is less stringently protected.” (Taken from LexisNexis, Esposito v SFX case)
2. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points)
Supreme Court of New York in 1996 & the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division in 1997
3. Briefly – state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points)
Mrs. Esposito’s bridal photo was published in a newspaper alongside other brides. The SFX radio station disc jockey’s, during one of their aired segments called “The ugliest bride contest” discussed Esposito’s photo commenting on how she looked and other factors that would qualify her for the winner of the “ugliest bride.” The radio also opened the floors for other to vote on the photos as well. The disc jockeys announced Esposito’s full name over the radio and her superiors’ names. Esposito heard the comments along with her coworkers. Esposito sought out for emotional distress and was deemed to receive compensation. SFX then appealed the decision where they lost again.
4. According to the case, why was this not defamation, and what tort did the court approve a filing for? (5 points)
“A statement is defamatory if it tends to expose the plaintiff to public hatred, contempt, ridicule or disgrace--that is, if it would tend to lead the average person in the community to form an evil or bad opinion of the plaintiff.” (Taken from LexisNexis, Esposito v SFX case)
“The tort of ‘intentional infliction of emotional distress’ is defined in PJI 3:6 (1997 Supp) as follows: ‘One who (intentionally and for the purpose of causing severe emotional distress, recklessly 2 )