Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/33

Click to flip

33 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
NEW YORK TIMES CO. V. SULLIVAN, 1964
public officials have to prove actual malice(knowledge of falsity and reckless disregard for the truth.)
CURTIS PUBLISHING CO. V. BUTTS, 1967
public figures have to prove actual malice
GERTZ V. ROBERT WELSCH, INC., 1974
private people have to prove actual malice for punitive damages. differentiated b/n three types of public figures,general, limited purpose, and involuntary
General/All Purpose Public Figures
persons who've achieved pervasive fame or notoriety in their communities or are pervasively involved in the affairs of society.
Limited Purpose Public Figures
people that thrust themselves to the forefront of particular controversies in order to influence the resolution of issues involved.
Involuntary Public Figures
thrust into a matter of public concern not by voluntary actions but through bad luck.
TIME INC. V. FIRESTONE, 1976
Mrs. Firestone private person because her divorce wasn't a public controversy that impacts the public.
HARTE HANKS COMM. V. CONNAUGHTON, 1989
newspaper's inaction (not interviewing Patsy, or listening to tapes), was purposeful avoidance of the truth, which is reckless disregard and actual malice.
The omission is easy to understand if there were serious doubts and the newspaper wanted to publish anyway. What case was this?
Harte-Hanks Comm's v. Connaughton
T/F and why?: Failure to investigate, standing alone, is insufficent for finding of actual malice.
True. But purposeful avoidance of the truth IS.
T/F: Testimony alone may be insufficient to show belief in the truth.
True
Define Negligence
Conduct that creates an unreasonable risrk of harm; conduct that would be avoided by reasonable care; failure to exercise reasonable or ordinary care.
public officials must prove actual malice. which case?
NYT v. Sullivan
Public officials have a higher burden of proof. Which case?
NYT v. Sullivan
Private persons must prove actual malice in order to win punitive damages. Which case?
Gertz v. Robert Welsh
Limit for punitive damages in VA
$350,000
Which case in Gazette v Harris had a finding of actual malice?
Flemming v Moore. UVA developer ad np called professor racist. Placed ad with insufficent evidence to reduce professor's voice of opposition.
3 types of damages
compensatory, special, and punitive
compensatory
ie to pay for harmed reputation
special damages
ie salary if lost job
public official
works for government, is paid with ublic funds, and is or appears to be in policy making decision
limited purpose public figure
must be an ongoing public controversy (social, political, economic, or gov issues); person must have thrust himself into the conversey, in an atempt to affect the outcome of the controversy.
example of a limited purpose public figure
pastor leading a movement to stop gambling in a state.
pre-defense defenses
summary judgment, statue of limitations
defenses
summary judgement, statute of limitations, defeat an element of the plaintifffs burden of proof, truth, qualified privilege, opinion
three complete defenses
truth, qualified privilege, and opinion
qualified privilege
a privilege to discuss matters conducted in an absolutely privileged forum
qualifications of qualified privilege
report must be accurate, fair, and made w/o common law malice
reporting defenses
good reporting and neutral reporting
good reporting
no negligence
neutral reporting
allows media to report on newsworthy commentary, even if journalists have doubts ab the truth of the statements being made
5 criteria for neutral reporting defense
comments must be newsworthy and related to a public controversy, made by a respectable prsn or org, about a public official or public figure, accuratly reporting with opposing views, reported impartially
no such thing as a false idea
gertz v robert welsch, inc.