Everything MLRC has published, in any publication, since 2017.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court may soon simplify its Byzantine interpretation of the Commonwealth’s Anti-SLAPP Law, if the justices’ questions at a recent oral argument are anything to go by.
It’s hard to believe that one-quarter of the way through the 21st century, with Americans spending more time looking at screens than ever before, the criminal trials of a former President and a leading candidate to be our next President will not be televised.
New Jersey’s long-awaited version of the UPEPA Anti-SLAPP law becomes effective with filings as of October 9, 2023, but now it has added teeth, not from the Legislature, but because of the Appellate Division’s sweeping published decision in Neuwirth, requiring all “public” defamation cases to plead specific facts supporting an allegation of actual malice.
“His post did not advocate ‘lawless’ and ‘imminent’ action, nor was it ‘likely’ to produce such action," wrote the court.
It is rare to see three powerful amicus briefs filed at the motion to dismiss stage. But the unusual context only underscores the fundamental arguments made in the briefs: that DeSantis’s actions, as alleged in the complaint, are inimical to and corrosive of three fundamental pillars of American society – law, politics, and business.
North Carolina Court Holds Records in Possession of Third-Party Contractor Subject to Public Records Disclosure RequirementsLauren Russell and Kaitlin Gurney
The court also held that even though requestor, Charlotte television station WBTV, received the records before a final ruling on the merits, it was entitled to recover its attorneys’ fees under North Carolina’s public records law mandating fee awards to claimants who substantially prevail in compelling disclosure of public records.
Washington Post Wins Suit Seeking Disciplinary Records of Former LGBTQ and Community Policing Liaison with History of Excessive ForceMargaret N. Strouse, Maxwell S. Mishkin, and Chuck Tobin
In an important victory for police transparency, DC Superior Court Judge Maurice A. Ross granted the Post’s motion for summary judgment, rejected the District’s arguments for withholding the records under FOIA’s privacy exemption, and ruled that the Post should be awarded its attorney’s fees.
In a decision clarifying the limits of absolute immunity in defamation claims, the Connecticut Supreme Court held that a former Yale student accused of sexually assaulting a classmate can bring a civil defamation suit against his accuser arising out of a campus disciplinary proceeding.
The directive is the first in the nation to expressly prohibit legislators from using so-called “ephemeral messaging” apps when discussing public business.
But justices differed on the impact of closed nature of the trial court’s proceedings regarding the early release, with the majority ruling that the closure required that the release order be vacated and the dissent arguing that such an action was not required.
Judge Albright issued an Order preliminarily enjoining HB 900, holding that it violated the First Amendment because it compels speech, is unconstitutionally vague, and is an impermissible prior restraint.
The tribunal noted that “journalists in Mexico are sometimes subject to physical attacks, harassment, and intimidation due to their reporting, making Mexico one of the most dangerous places in the world, outside war zones, for journalists.”
Despite some gloom and doom about the future of fair use after the Supreme Court’s decision in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts Inc. v. Goldsmith last May, it seems that for documentary film makers at least, fair use is in roaring good health.
A state trial court recently dismissed claims under New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination arising from newspaper columns that were allegedly motivated by discriminatory animus.
Mr. Weiler attempted to put the cart before the horse here by arguing that the impact of the statements – true or false – harmed his reputation. But a plaintiff can’t proceed without evidence to support an essential element.
Newsday moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that New York’s anti-SLAPP Law applied to the action, that the complaint does not satisfy the heightened pleading standard imposed by the anti-SLAPP Law, and that the complaint should be dismissed because the plaintiff has not and cannot establish that Newsday published the article with actual malice.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed the District Court’s grant of summary judgment to several media defendants (The New York Times, CBS, ABC, Gannett, and Rolling Stone) in a series of long-running defamation cases brought by Nicholas Sandmann.
The court—which months earlier had ruled that the record fell within the FOIA’s privacy exemption—held that the agency’s attempt to claw back the document and prohibit its dissemination would constitute a prior restraint in violation of the First Amendment.