Hustler Magazine Inc V. Falwell Case Brief

In Hustler Magazine inc v. Falwell, Jerry Falwell sued Hustler Magazine for placing an advertisement in their magazine about Falwell. The satire is about Falwell having sex for the first time with his mother. The Campari advertising campaign was obviously a satire, but “Falwell sued Flynt for libel, appropriation and intentional infliction of emotional distress” (pg. 294). The court understood that the advertisement was just a satire and it was not meant to destroy his character. “A federal district court jury rejected the libel claim because the satire was so outlandish no one would believe it was a statement of fact” (pg.294). Falwell did compensated $100,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages. At first the fourth circuit affirmed, then the court reversed the decision.
When developing an intentional infliction of emotional distress the plaintiff must prove actual malice as a …show more content…
Phelps, members of the Westboro Baptist Church picketed near the church of a deceased solider. The father of the deceased solider sued the members of the Westboro Baptist Church for IIED and other torts. The picketer’s signs were making statements like “Thank God for Dead Soldiers”, “God Hate Fags” and “You’re Going to Hell” (pg.319). Snyder, the dead solider, believed that the picket signs was made towards his son. The Westboro Baptist Church picket signs was protected by the first amendment. The picketers have the right to express their feelings, even though it was near the solider funeral service. They were also on public property and was about 100 ft. away from the funeral service. There statements was a public matter and was not towards the solider. The court said “the Westboro picketers were aiming their expression at the general public, not at Albert Snyder or his family in particular (pg.297). So, Snyder would not be able to win the IIED lawsuit. “The judgment of the United States court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is affirmed”