Preview

Libel and Slander

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
540 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Libel and Slander
Libel and Slander

Libel and slander are very important to each and every court case. By having this defamation, it helps you decide whether someone is guilty or not guilty. Libel means that the actuation is written down somewhere and slander means that it is spoken out loud. To have this kind of case the material needs to be offending someone and false either by word of mouth or if it published somewhere. The most important defense to a libel or slander case is someone telling the truth, which is an absolute defense to an action of defamation. I am going to discuss the 1964 case New York Times versus Sullivan shows how a public figure attempts to bring an action for defamation. In 1960 the New York Times published “Heed Their Rising Voices” a fundraising advertisement for the civil rights movement. “Heed Their Rising Voices" was a fundraising advertisement signed by civil-rights leaders that criticized, among other things, certain actions of the Montgomery, Alabama, police department. Some of the facts in the advertisement were incorrect. Although no names were mentioned, Sullivan, Montgomery's police commissioner, sued The New York Times for libel and won $500,000 in an Alabama court. The case then went to The Supreme Court and The Supreme Court overturned the lower court ruling. Allowing libel lawsuits in cases like this one would tend to hold back future criticism of government officials. Even legitimate criticism would fall over speakers, leading to self-censorship. At issue was the protection given press criticism of the official conduct of public officials. In overturning the lower court's ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court held that First Amendment protection of free speech is not dependent on the truth, popularity, or usefulness of the expressed ideas. The decision held that debate on public issues would be inhibited if public officials could recover for honest error that produced false defamatory statements about their official conduct. The court

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hustler Magazine versus Jerry Falwell was a case that involved many key elements. First of all it was a case that examined if a public figure such as Jerry Falwell could collect for emotional damages sustained to him by a parody that was published in an issue of Hustler Magazine. Secondly, did Hustler invade Falwell's privacy by publishing the contents of the parody? The most important aspect of the case, that was under review, was if Hustler was in accordance with their First Amendment Rights, of freedom of speech, by publishing the parody.…

    • 505 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    On June 17, 1996, a bridal photograph of the plaintiff and her husband was posted in the wedding section of the Daily Gazette. On June 17, 1996, in the morning radio broadcast, the defendant (being the radio station and employees) had broadcasted offensive, abusive and ridiculing remarks at the physical attractiveness of the bride (plaintiff), including her full name, her place of employment (which happens to be the competing radio station). These remarks were part of the radio station’s “Ugliest Bride…

    • 1852 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Branzburg v. Hayes was the only ever supreme court case to deal with reporter’s privilege. The ruling of this case was that reporter’s had no right to hide their sources in a court case. The chief justice at the time,Warren Burger, made a point that reporters, “like other citizens, [must] respond to relevant questions put to them in the course of a valid grand jury investigation or criminal trial (Fargo,2010).” With a decision that was five for and four against, this case was not an open and shut many thought it to be. Calling into play a look at the first amendment and what it really means when it says the freedom of speech. Interpreting a document that is more than two hundred years old is not an easy task to accomplish, having to combine…

    • 165 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Reasoning: Justice Black (with Douglas Concurring) The bill or rights was enacted to ensure basic freedoms, one of which is the freedom of the press. One of the vital roles of the press is to keep the people informed about what the government is doing. In this case, the government attempted to censor the press under the guise of national security. Justice Black concludes that security of the country can best be preserved by a public well informed by the press.…

    • 1889 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    MGMT520

    • 567 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Answer: According to the court in this case, the most jealousy 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.…

    • 567 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The case was dismissed due to the state of New York not having a common-law claim for invasion of privacy. Also, the plaintiff’s claim for violation of civil rights law 50 and 51 was dismissed because the plaintiff’s name and likeness was not up for trade or being advertised. The claim for defamation was dismissed because the statement “flagrant opportunist” was the opinion of the defendant.…

    • 440 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    With the bitter wounds of British tyranny still stinging, the Founding Fathers thought up the first amendment. Democracy flourishes only when freedoms to express views, both political and those of other concerns, are guaranteed. What happens, however, when your own government seizes and destroys these rights, in its attempt to censor the public 's pursuit of political knowledge. The Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) court case brings forth this question and many more, as Citizens United, a nonprofit organization, was challenged in their attempt to broadcast "Hillary: the movie," by the FEC. The verdict, which was ruled in favor of Citizens United, deemed the film an act of the organization 'a first amendment right to free speech. Correct in their ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the abolition of restrictions…

    • 945 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Bugusa, Inc.

    • 1676 Words
    • 7 Pages

    WIRETIME, Inc. committed a defamatory tort which is “a civil wrong where one party has acted, or in some cases failed to act, and that action or inaction causes a loss to be suffered by another party” (Melvin, 2011, p. 208). A tort was committed because WIRETIME, Inc. made a statement that will hurt the reputation of BUGusa, Inc. The statement made is “a false and defamatory statement concerning a party’s reputation, honesty, or a statement that subjected a party to hate, contempt, or ridicule. In order to qualify as defamatory, the statement must have a tendency to harm the reputation of the plaintiff” (Melvin, 2011, p. 209). Next WIRETIME, Inc. placed a defamatory advertisement in a well-known industry magazine that contained a statement that is accusing BUGusa, Inc. for having a bad product. By doing this, the dissemination of the advertisement to a third party is an element that requires the statement must somehow reach the ears or eyes of someone other than the tortfeasor and the victim, (Melvin, 2011, p. 209). Finally, the advertisement has the third element, specificity. Specificity means the WIRETIME, Inc. advertisement specified a particular party, BUGusa, Inc. and their product and services, (Melvin 2011). Because of this defamatory advertisement, BUGusa, Inc. will probably suffer damages or loss of clients because of the negative implications stated in the WIRETIME, Inc. advertisement.…

    • 1676 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Sheppard Case

    • 1274 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Black dissents there were “no threat or menace to the integrity of trail.” “the courts have consistently required that the press have a free hand, even though we sometimes deplored its sensationalism.”…

    • 1274 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Business Law Quiz

    • 26730 Words
    • 107 Pages

    | Bill sued Ted for libel over statements Ted published in the company newsletter. A jury heard the case and found that no libel had occurred because the statements were true. Bill is very unhappy with this decision, but cannot sue Ted again over these statements because of the doctrine of…

    • 26730 Words
    • 107 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Supreme Court later ruled that the Sedition Act was a direct violation of the press and people's ability to express them. New York Times v. Sullivan ruled that the press has the right to make any type of statement without fear of repercussion of the government and that if something was defamatory then actions are legally acceptable.…

    • 744 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Flynt V Falwell Summary

    • 891 Words
    • 4 Pages

    v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), ruled that a public figure may hold a speaker liable for the damage to reputation caused by publication of a defamatory falsehood, but only if the statement was made "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." This ad parody did not display actual malice, that is Hustler did not publish false facts in order to intentionally harm this man, also that no reasonable person could believe the facts of the ad to be true. Although the ad may have been distasteful and outrageous, according to the respondent, "Outrageousness" in the area of political and social discourse has an inherent subjectiveness about it which would allow a jury to impose liability on the basis of the jurors' tastes or views, or perhaps on the basis of their dislike of a particular expression. An "outrageousness" standard thus runs afoul of our longstanding refusal to allow damages to be awarded because the speech in question may have an adverse emotional impact on the audience. See NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886, 910 (1982) ("Speech does not lose its protected character . . . simply because it may embarrass others or coerce them into action"). Also, as stated in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726…

    • 891 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Introduction to Law

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages

    It is likely she could win a slander suit because the statement was false and it was printed with malice.…

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    parliament 's enactment of a series of tax levies to pay off a large national…

    • 996 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    There are now limitations of free speech that were not put in place before because they have evolved as a problem of our society in this day and age. These limitations that "Fall outside of its protection are obscenity, child pornography, defamation, incitement to violence and true threats of violence," (Richards) "Even in those categories, there are tests that have to be met in order for the speech to be illegal. Beyond that, we are free to speak" (Richards). The Supreme Court of the United States of America fully supports and condones the First Amendment in all aspects and cases that don’t fall under any of these categories. This law is held to the highest importance because our country is run off of the human rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and without freedom to have a voice this would not exist. The limitations are set in place, but when the Founding Fathers passed this Amendment they wanted absolute freedom of speech, as they felt there should be no limits on what can be said and not said. Everyone has a voice or at least that’s how it started off. Present day issues, such as the items listed above, shouldn’t create a limitation on what can and cannot be said. That’s why we live in a free country unlike any in the world.…

    • 1792 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays