vs Sullivan Jennifer Koch Civics and Economics Block 2 Official Name New York Times Company vs Sullivan Case Heard January of 1964 Case Decided March of 1964 ID: 586075
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "New York Times" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
New York Times vs. Sullivan
Jennifer Koch
Civics and Economics
Block 2Slide2
Official Name: New
York Times Company
vs. SullivanCase Heard: January of 1964Case Decided: March of 1964Plaintiff: NY Times Co.Defendant: L.B. SullivanNEW YORK TIMES v. SULLIVAN. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 22 October 2013. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_39>.
Case OverviewSlide3
Malice and falsity assumed
No proof of truth
Didn’t need proof of being harmed Sullivan won(in all courts except US Supreme)NEW YORK TIMES v. SULLIVAN. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 22 October 2013. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_39>.Alabama Public PolicySlide4
Sullivan was not even mentioned in the adNo proof of malice intent
Unaware of the false statements
1st Amendment Freedom of press Freedom of speechhttp://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0376_0254_ZS.html Plaintiff (NY Times)Slide5
Montgomery city commissionerResponsible for police departmentNo proof ad was
true
Under Alabama lawAd contain some false statementshttp://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/history/new-york-times-company-v-sullivan.htmlDefendant(L.B. Sullivan)Slide6
New York Times Co.Washington Post CompanyThe Tribune Company
ACLU (American Civil Liberties
Union)SullivanNonehttp://aclu.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=394 Amicus Curiae BriefsSlide7
Ruled in favor of NY Times Co.
9
in favor to 0 opposed1st amendment Published statements (even false)Unless made with malicehttp://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/history/new-york-times-company-v-sullivan.htmlSupreme Court DecisionSlide8
There was no dissenting opinion
9
to 0 rulinghttp://www.freedomforum.org/packages/first/defamationandfirstamendment/casesummaries.htm Dissenting Opinion Slide9
States can not award public officialsUnless
malice intent
is proven1st amendmentPublished statement (even false)About public officialsUnless malice intenthttp://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=376&invol=254Present Public Policy