Sentences with phrase «libel suit by»

Defended libel suit by public official against newspaper; case dismissed after two - month jury trial

Coincidentally, today the Philadelphia Daily News reported another libel suit by Sprague, this one against Philadelphia radio host Howard Eskin and Infinity Broadcasting.

He was in the news again this week for being named the defendant in a libel suit by Joanne St. Lewis, a law professor at UofO, over a blog post on Rancourt's site, UofO Watch.

It added that the arm - twisting tactic was a panicky measure to divert attention from the criminal libel suit by the former governor against a member of the House, Dr Samuel Omotoso, and the governor's aide, Lere Olayinka, over allegations of fraud.

A Manhattan federal judge on Monday promised to decide by the end of August whether to let a libel suit by Sarah Palin against The New York Times proceed after hearing 90 minutes of arguments on the case.

As bloggers have noted, this case will be one of the first tests of a new Texas law designed to discourage capricious libel suits by putting the burden on the plaintiff (Wakefield in this case) to prove that the defendants» speech has caused damage before the suit can go forward.

Not exact matches

March 14, 2018: BuzzFeed News, which is being sued by Cohen for libel after publishing the Steele dossier alleging ties between Trump (including Cohen) and the Russian government, sent a letter from its attorney to Avenatti, Daniels's attorney, asking him to preserve «any and all documents or communications about any relationship and / or sexual encounter (s) Ms. Clifford had and / or was alleged to have had, with President Trump» because they may be relevant to Cohen's suit.

A $ 45 million libel suit against two Southampton residents by former New York State Democratic Committee chairman Jay Jacobs has been dismissed.

A Brooklyn sex - crimes prosecutor accused of sexual assault by a reporter for the Daily News has fired back with a $ 10 million libel suit.

No fewer than five police vans, scores of armed policemen and operatives of the Department of State Services were deplored in the Kwara State High Court in Ilorin on Thursday to forestall the breakdown of law and order as the libel suit filed by the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, against an online medium, SaharaReporters, and its publisher, Omoyele Sowore, came up for hearing.

A recent survey by the charity Sense About Science revealed that more than 1 in 3 editors of scientific or medical journals have refused material for fear of a libel suit.

«Michael Mann, who chose to file what many consider to be a cynical SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) libel suit in the British Columbia Supreme Court, Vancouver six long years ago, has astonished legal experts by refusing to comply with the court direction to hand over all his disputed graph's data.

And by making him an admin in effect endorsing him wikipedia will not be able to slither its way out of it like they do with most of the libel suits they get.

«while Irving chose a fool for his lawyer (by representing himself in his spectacularly failed libel suit against historian, Deborah Lipstadt), Mann's lawyers appear have saddled themselves with a fool for a client.»

National Review is asking for money to defend itself against a libel law suit filed by Professor Michael Mann for defaming him by accusing him of academic fraud.

However, perhaps the way to fix that is to start applying a higher level of quality control rather than by threatening libel suits against people who publicly point out the problems?

Is being known as the journal who tries to sue critics of their editorial policies (or worse, tries to intimidate critics by threatening libel suits) really going to help?

In the realm of discussions about science, Simon Singh's triumph over a libel suit brought by the British Chiropractors Association stands out, as does Ben Goldacre's successful # 500,000 defense against Matthias Rath — a vitamin salesman peddling bogus AIDS cures.

The legislation was prompted, as the BBC report says, by a libel suit against American writer Rachel Ehrenfeld who was sued in England, a notorious destination for libel tourism, because of a book on the funding of terrorism.

Dan's business litigation included defending a truck manufacturer in suits by disgruntled dealers, the defense of numerous officers and directors of failed savings and loans, a recovery for limited partners in a franchise who were misled by a franchisor, defense of libel actions, trade secret litigation on behalf of both plaintiffs and defendants, lease covenant disputes for commercial tenants of shopping centers, and business partnership disputes.

There have been internet libel law suits where judges have issued orders directing that anonymous internet bloggers are to be revealed in the full light of day, such orders are normally accompanied by protests from a trivial yet noisy family of rabid people who deem that freedom of expression should be absolute and unconditional & the speaker should not be held to account for their words, without consideration to the accuracy or deceptiveness of the allegations.

I'm not sure what relevance any of that has to the current case, since the suit in question was governed by Canadian libel law.

The gist of her suit was that the Post, by quoting a MySpace page in which Cordero «gives a graphic depiction of a masturbatory fantasy» in which she has sex with multiple men and women, implied she was a «promiscuous slut» and therefore committed libel per se.

While third parties are protected from such suits in the United States by the Communications Decency Act, Canada has no such protection, he says, and that raises «a significant threat of «libel chill.»»

In 2000, Julius successfully defended the American scholar Deborah Lipstadt in a libel suit brought by the historian David Irving, whom Lipstadt had included among the culprits in her book «Denying the Holocaust.»

Represented manufacturer of surgical products in trade libel suit brought by former distributor.

More importantly, the suit concerned only one person named in the article (out of many other stories and discussions of research), who was determined by the judge to be a private individual rather than a public official, and therefore allowed to prove libel without meeting the standard (malice) required for public figures.