 | Philippines - 1998 - 190 sider
...his official conduct unless he proves that the statement was made with 'actual malice' — that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not'. The United States Supreme Court went further in Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts, where such immunity... | |
 | 1916 - 712 sider
...considered libelous. The court said there was no evidence that the newspaper published the letter with the knowledge that it was false or with "reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." / In Florida, a law which excluded administrators from membership in professional education associations... | |
 | 1969 - 810 sider
...conduct: no damages should be allowed unless the statement was made with " 'actual malice' — that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.'' TIME DOES NOT PERMIT me to elaborate the views on these issues which I have set forth elsewhere over... | |
 | United States. Congress. House. Committee on Appropriations - 1964 - 1048 sider
...his official conduct unless he proves that the statement was made with 'actual malice' — that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." (376 US at 279-280.) 2. The above Federal rule is clearly applicable to broadcast stations. A public... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - 1964 - 948 sider
...and Reality, 39 NYUL Rev. 1. GOLDBERG, J., concurring in result. 376 US 'actual malice' — that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." Ante, at 279-280. The Court thus rules that the Constitution gives citizens and newspapers a "conditional... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - 1968 - 644 sider
...conduct unless the verdict is based on proof of "actual malice" — that is, proof that the defamatory statement was made "with knowledge that it was false...reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." 376 US, at 280. The present cases involve not "public officials," but "public figures" whose views... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - 1968 - 654 sider
...conduct unless the verdict is based on proof of "actual malice" — that is, proof that the defamatory statement was made "with knowledge that it was false...reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." 376 US, at 280. The present cases involve not "public officials," but "public figures" whose views... | |
 | United States. Federal Communications Commission - 1968 - 1082 sider
...mind what "malice" means in this context. As denned by the Supreme Court, it means that the defamatory statement was made "with knowledge that it was false...reckless disregard of whether it was false or not" (New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 US at 279-280) . That test permits great latitude of speech in order... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary - 1968 - 688 sider
...his official conduct unless he proves that the statement was made with 'actual malice' — that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." Justices Black and Douglas believe that Anendment I grants the press "an absolute imuni ty for criticism... | |
 | Arnold Marshall Rose - 1968 - 301 sider
...courts are recognizing that it is virtually impossible for a plaintiff to prove that a defendant's libelous statement was made "with knowledge that it was false" or "with reckless disregard of the truth," because knowledge and recklessness are only in the mind of the defendant. Only the defendant... | |
| |
The constitutional guarantees require, we think, a federal rule that prohibits a public official from recovering damages for a defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he proves that the statement was made with "actual malice" —... 
