JOURN 4000 1st Edition Lecture 20Outline of Last LectureI. LibelOutline of Current LectureI. LibelCurrent LectureRosenbloom-Matter of public interest actual malice standard-Private person in public controversy prove actual maliceElmer Gertz- 1974-Last case in libel revolution-Nationwide conspiracy about cops cops support a Communist takeover-Robert Welch Inc. said Gertz was the architect of the frame up-Judgment nov judgment judge will render in spit of jury’s ruling overrule the juryPublic figures according to the Supreme Court:1. Pervasive fame/notoriety- household namea. All purpose public figure2. Voluntarily inject themselves into public controversy to try to influence the outcomea. Limited public figure-Public figures have greater access to the media-Involuntary public figures are rare-Gertz bottom line: states can decide for themselves the standards for private individuals of liability These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.-Cannot impose liability without fault1. Negligence private individual, this is enough to win a libel suit2. Gross irresponsibility (NY)3. Actual malice-In MO, jury has to find fault, but does not define fault standard of liability is fault, but negligence will probably be enough because fault is not defined Punitive damages actual malice is the requirement across the board1976- SC has a problem-Treat private individual more tenderly-Who’s a private individual? Time Inc. vs. Firestone-Time reported that Mrs. Firestone’s husband got a divorce based on adultery-She is not a public figure-Had not assumed any role in the affairs of society-Famous in Palm Beach? Not pervasive enoughHutchinson vs. Proxmire -Proxmire was a senator, gave out a Golden Fleece award-Hutchinson was doing federally funded research on monkeys won award-Hutchinson was not a public
View Full Document