Restatement (Second) Of Torts § 566

12 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Bertell Ollman v. Rowland Evans
  750 F.2d 970· D.C. Cir.· 1984-12-06 ·cited 117×
  The court held that the statement regarding the plaintiff's professional status was not absolutely privileged opinion and could be the basis for a defamation claim.
• Lewis v. Time Inc.
  710 F.2d 549· 9th Cir.· 1983-07-12 ·cited 55×
  The court held that negative inferences in a magazine article, based on true and disclosed facts, are constitutionally protected as opinion and cannot form the basis for a defamation claim. It also held that the federal rules regarding jury trial demands apply to removed cases, a
• Harlan E. ORR v. The Argus-Press Co.
  586 F.2d 1108· 6th Cir.· 1978-10-19 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the newspaper's article was substantially true and protected by the actual malice standard under both Michigan common law and the First Amendment, thus vacating the judgment against the newspaper.
• Stembridge v. Mintz
  652 So. 2d 444· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-03-22 ·cited 28×
  John Stembridge appealed a partial summary judgment on liability in a defamation action brought by attorney Mark Mintz. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that Stembridge's Bar Inquiry form constituted nonactionable pure opinion and that summary judgment based solely o
• Fla. Med. Ctr., Inc. v. NEW York Post Co., Inc.
  568 So. 2d 454· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-09-12 ·cited 17×
  Florida Medical Center appeals the dismissal of its libel action against the New York Post and columnist Maxwell Newton for publishing an article accusing the hospital of unnecessary medical procedures, overcharging, and dishonest billing practices. The court holds that the artic
• Stevens v. Tillman
  855 F.2d 394· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that statements of opinion are not actionable under Illinois law unless they imply undisclosed defamatory facts, and that the term 'racist' is not actionable per se.
• Suketu H. Nanavati, M.D. v. Burdette Tomlin Mem'l Hosp.
  857 F.2d 96· 3d Cir.· 1988-08-24 ·cited 12×
  Statements made by a physician to reporters about a patient's death and another doctor's competence, in the context of a known dispute and where reporters were familiar with the facts, are protected statements of opinion, not actionable slander.
• Dunn v. Gannett N.Y. Newspapers, Inc.
  833 F.2d 446· 3d Cir.· 1987-11-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a newspaper headline translating a Spanish word used to describe litterers as 'pigs' did not constitute libel against a public official absent proof of actual malice, and that an open letter comparing the official to dictators was protected opinion. The court
• Ilse Koch v. Goldway
  817 F.2d 507· 9th Cir.· 1987-05-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the alleged statement comparing the plaintiff to a Nazi war criminal was opinion, not fact, and therefore not actionable defamation, and also not extreme enough for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
• Flotech, Inc. v. E.I. DU Pont de Nemours & Co.
  814 F.2d 775· 1st Cir.· 1987-03-18 ·cited 3×
  The court held that Du Pont's press release was conditionally privileged and that the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence of actual malice to overcome this privilege.
• Evans v. Bayer
  684 F. Supp. 2d 1365· S.D. Fla.· 2010-02-12
  The court held that the plaintiff's speech was off-campus and protected, and that the defendant was not entitled to qualified immunity for suspending her.