LEWIS V. TIME INCORPORATED
710 F.2d 549 (1983)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Lewis (P) appealed a judgment for Time (D) in P's suit for defamation.
FACTS: D ran a cover story about shady lawyers. It named P in the following context:
Under these circumstances, it is hardly surprising that some Americans have grown cynical
about lawyers -- and the law. What is more, every day's newspaper offers up fresh horror
stories. . . . Thanks to painfully slow bar discipline, a northern California lawyer named
Jerome Lewis is still practicing law despite a $100,000 malpractice judgment against him in
1970 and a $60,000 judgment including punitive damages in 1974 for defrauding clients of
money. . . . P sued D for libel, slander, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of
emotional distress. D removed the case to the District Court. The court granted a partial
summary judgment in favor of D in that P's libel, slander, invasion of privacy, and
intentional infliction of emotional distress claims were all bound up into one claim for
relief for defamation. The district court held that D's statements about the money judgments
against P were protected because they were truthful statements of matters of public record.
The district court also granted P's motion for relief from his untimely demand for a jury
trial, but then on its own motion reconsidered and denied the motion. From a bench trial,
the judge ruled for D and P appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment