Term
|
Definition
| False allegation of fact in the media that injures the reputation of a living person. Normally a civil dispute (tort) and is essentially state law, but with constitutional safeguards since New York Times v Sullivan (1964) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Most libel cases are settled before trial by the media winning a summary judgment. |
|
|
Term
| In a libel case, the plaintiff has the burden of proof to show what? (Six things) |
|
Definition
| defamatory contents, falsity, publication, identification, fault and harm. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Something that would tend to damage the plaintiff's standing among some respectable segment of society. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| No, but a lawsuit in progress at the plaintiff's death can continue. |
|
|
Term
| Trade libel (product disparagement) |
|
Definition
| Making negative statements about a product. |
|
|
Term
| Difference between libel per se and libel per quod? |
|
Definition
| Per se = libel on it's face; per quod is libel in contect. |
|
|
Term
| When interpreting possible defamatory statements, the court will look at what two things? |
|
Definition
| Overall context (not an isolated phrase taken out of context) and its effect on the average reader/listener. The "ordinary meaning" of the word is what is assumed. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Emotional, exaggerated name=calling. It is not defamatory according to Greenbelt Publishing Assn. v Bresler (1970) |
|
|
Term
| Can someone be libeled by implication? |
|
Definition
| If the story that is literally true leaves a false impression then yes. |
|
|
Term
| Are "red flag" words always defamatory? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Philadelphia Newspapers v Hepps (1986) |
|
Definition
| Stated that libel plaintiffs must shoulder the burden of proving falsity if the statement concerns a matter of public concern, thus making falsity something the plaintiff must show rather than a defense, as in common law. |
|
|
