Αποτελέσματα Αναζήτησης
When the Times refused and claimed that they were puzzled by the request, Sullivan filed a libel action against the Times and a group of African American ministers mentioned in the ad. A jury in state court awarded him $500,000 in damages.
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan: To sustain a claim of defamation or libel, the First Amendment requires that the plaintiff show that the defendant knew that a statement was false or was reckless in deciding to publish the information without investigating whether it was accurate.
He brought this civil libel action against the four indiv dual petitioners, who are Negroes and Alabama clergymen, and against petitioner the New York Times Company, a New York corporation which publishes the New York Times, a daily newspaper.
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision ruling that the freedom of speech protections in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution restrict the ability of public officials to sue for defamation.
6 Αυγ 2023 · The landmark New York Times v. Sullivan case led to new protections against publishers who, in their criticism of government, are sued by government officials for libel. The New York Times was sued by the Montgomery, Alabama, city commissioner for errors in a civil rights advertisement.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. A public official must show by clear and convincing evidence that the statements made against him are false and were made with actual malice. Actual malice requires the speaker to know that the statement was false or that he acted with reckless disregard for the truth.
The events that led to the 1964 landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision confirming freedom of the press under the First Amendment in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan began in March 1960, after Martin Luther King’s supporters published a fundraising appeal on the civil rights leader’s behalf.
