Thursday, April 30, 2009

Absence Of Malice

The New York of Appeals held that a defamation action against the New York Post was properly dismissed on summary judgment. The Post had reprinted portions of a lengthy article from the Los Angeles Times about a license revocation action brought against a medical doctor for alleged overprescriptions given to Ozzy Osbourne when he had a reality television show. The headline and a line of text inaccurately suggested that the license had already been pulled. The article also correctly stated the status of the matter.The paper had printed a clarification when requested to do so.

The court majority held that the plaintiff could not show actual malice as opposed to negligence. A dissent states:

The undisputed facts are reletively simple: The New York Post took a factually-accurate Los Angeles Times article, which stated that the California Medical Board had "moved to revoke" plaintiff's license, and rewrote the article to falsely state, iin the headline and in the body of the article, that plaintiff's license had been "pulled" and "revoked". In my view, these facts raise, at the very least, a question of fact as to whether the Post acted with "actual malice".

(Mike Frisch)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2009/04/the-new-york-of-appeals-held-that-a-defamation-action-against-the-new-york-post-was-properly-dismissed-the-post-had-reprinte.html

Comparative Professions | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0115706086b7970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Absence Of Malice:

Comments

Post a comment