|
|
Greenbelt Co-Op. Publ. Assn., Inc. v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6 (1970)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Greenbelt Co-Op. Publ. Assn., Inc. v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6 (1970)
Greenbelt Cooperative Publishing Assn., Inc. v. Bresler No. 413 Argued February 24-25, 1970 Decided May 18, 1970 398 U.S. 6
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND
Syllabus
At public meetings before the Greenbelt, Maryland, City Council, the efforts of respondent, a prominent real estate developer and state legislator, to secure zoning variances for certain land he owned while the city was trying to acquire other land of his on which to build a school were vigorously discussed. In publishing in their newspaper full accounts of the meetings, petitioners reported that various citizens had characterized respondent’s negotiating position as "blackmail." Respondent, concededly a "public figure," brought this libel action against petitioners for publishing the reports notwithstanding their knowledge that he had not committed the crime of blackmail. The trial judge instructed the jury that respondent could recover if petitioners’ publications had been made with malice (defined as including "spite, hostility, or deliberate intention to harm") or reckless disregard of whether they were true or false, and that malice could be found from the "language" of the publication itself. The jury found for respondent, and the judgment was affirmed on appeal.
Held:
1. The trial court’s instructions, which permitted the jury to find liability merely on the basis of the reported hostile remarks made during a debate on a public issue, violated the First Amendment as made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, whether respondent is considered to be a "public official" or a "public figure." New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254; Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts, 388 U.S. 130. Pp. 8-11.
2. In the circumstances of this case, where it is undisputed that petitioners’ reports of the meetings were accurate, the word "blackmail" was not slanderous when spoken, or libelous when reported by petitioners, as there is no evidence whatsoever that the word was used to impute a crime to respondent or was intended as more than a vigorous epithet. Pp. 11-14.
253 Md. 324, 252 A.2d 755, reversed and remanded.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Greenbelt Co-Op. Publ. Assn., Inc. v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6 (1970) in 398 U.S. 6 398 U.S. 7. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XTQNGZMQZIXGNB1.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Greenbelt Co-Op. Publ. Assn., Inc. v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6 (1970), in 398 U.S. 6, page 398 U.S. 7. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XTQNGZMQZIXGNB1.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Greenbelt Co-Op. Publ. Assn., Inc. v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6 (1970). cited in 1970, 398 U.S. 6, pp.398 U.S. 7. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XTQNGZMQZIXGNB1.
|