Law.com
  • News
    • Newswire
    • Supreme Court
    • International
    • Legal Blog Watch
    • The Hot Seat
    • Video
  • Publications
    • The American Lawyer
    • Corporate Counsel
    • Law Technology News
    • The National Law Journal
    • New York Law Journal
    • New Jersey Law Journal
    • Connecticut Law Tribune
    • The Legal Intelligencer (PA)
    • Daily Business Review (FL)
    • Delaware Law Weekly
    • Daily Report (GA)
    • The Recorder (CA)
    • Texas Lawyer
    • Publication E-Alerts
    • More Publication Sites
  • Legal Research & Directories
    • Books Online
    • Smart Litigator
    • ALM Experts
    • Verdict Search
    • Court Reporters
    • Legal Dictionary
    • LegalTech® Directory
    • Newsletters
    • More Directories
  • Surveys, Lists & Rankings
    • Amlaw 100
    • NLJ 250
    • Global 100
    • The A-List
    • ALM Legal Intelligence
    • Surveys
    • More Lists & Rankings
  • Special Reports
  • lawjobs.com
  • LawCatalog Store
  • CLE & Events
    • CLE Center
    • ALM Events
    • LegalTech
    • Virtual LegalTech
    • Insight Legal Events
    • Webinars
Home
 
Article
Twitter LinkedIn RSS
Sign Up for Newsletters

Law.com Home > Calling Someone Homosexual Is Not Defamation Per Se, Judge Rules in Suit by Anna Nicole Smith Lawyer

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Calling Someone Homosexual Is Not Defamation Per Se, Judge Rules in Suit by Anna Nicole Smith Lawyer

By Mark Hamblett All Articles 

New York Law Journal

August 13, 2009

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

A statement that someone is a homosexual is not defamation per se in New York state, a federal judge has ruled.

Southern District of New York Judge Denny Chin said in a ruling Wednesday that a "veritable sea change in attitudes about homosexuality" has led him to conclude that today the New York Court of Appeals would not hold that calling someone a homosexual was defamation per se.

However, the judge also said that statements asserting homosexual conduct might be found by a jury to be defamatory in Stern v. Cosby, 07 Civ. 8536.

The suit was brought by Howard K. Stern, the lawyer and former lover of tabloid sensation Anna Nicole Smith, who died in 2007 after being found unconscious in a Florida hotel room. An autopsy revealed that Smith died from an accidental prescription and over-the-counter drug overdose. In March, Stern and two doctors were charged in California with conspiring to furnish drugs to Smith.

Stern claims television journalist Rita Cosby defamed him at several points in her book "Blond Ambition: The Untold Story Behind Anna Nicole Smith's Death."

Stern said the book contains 19 defamatory statements, including the false suggestion that he had engaged in sex with Larry Birkhead, the man who was ultimately determined to be the father of Smith's daughter, Dannielynn, who was born in 2006.

Ruling on Cosby's motion for summary judgment, Chin allowed 11 allegedly defamatory statements to go to trial, including the Stern/Birkhead sex statement and another claim that Smith had a videotape of the men having sex and watched it repeatedly.

Additional statements Chin kept in the lawsuit in his 58-page ruling were that Smith's son, Daniel, said Stern "pimped" Smith to other men for money; that Stern "pimped" her at least 50 times a year, sometimes after drugging her; that Stern perjured himself in a Florida proceeding by claiming he was the father of Dannielynn; that he extorted Birkhead; and that people felt Stern was a threat to the life of Smith, thought he was involved in her death, and had a financial motive to kill her.

Chin first rejected the claim by Cosby that Stern was libel-proof. He then turned to the issue of defamation per se.

The New York Court of Appeals has held there are four classes of statements that constitute defamation per se: accusations that the plaintiff committed a serious crime, statements that "tend to injure another in his or her trade, business or profession," accusations that the plaintiff has a "loathsome disease," or statements that impute "unchastity to a woman."

But the state's high court has never confronted the issue of whether homosexuality would qualify, so Chin was faced with the task of predicting how the Court would rule. Several factors convinced him that it would not consider such statements defamation per se.

First, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision invalidating laws criminalizing homosexual conduct in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).

"[T]o the extent that courts previously relied on the criminality of homosexual conduct in holding that a statement imputing homosexuality subjects a person to contempt and ridicule ... Lawrence has foreclosed such reliance," Chin said.

Continue reading

  • 1
  • 2

Next



Subscribe to New York Law Journal

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld
  • Davis Wright Tremaine
  • Bryan Cave

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • New York Court of Appeals
  • Florida hotel
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • Hachette Book Group USA

Key categories

    
  • Civil Rights and Constitutional Law
  • General Civil Practice

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Court Officials Seek to Reform Process of Naming Acting Justices
    •      
  2. The 2013 Am Law 100
    •      
  3. Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit
    •      
  4. Lawyers Sanctioned Over Porn Lawsuits File Appeal
    •      
  5. Law for Laymen
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

Hiring Interns? Be Sure to Do It Right

ACC Weighs in on Arizona's In-House Pro Bono Rules

Ex-Dewey Partners Face New Foe in Firm's Bankruptcy

S&C Adds Linklaters Restructuring Partner in London
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Enron Sandbox Stirs Up Private Data, Again

LegalTech West Coast Wraps Up With Ethics, VC News

In Tricky Prosecutions, Judges Play Peacemakers

Ropers Majeski Tries to Re-Invent Itself
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Summer Programs Still in a Drought

Lawyer Not Covered for Alleged Malpractice at Prior Firm
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Firm Takes Another Hit in Bid for 'Unconscionable' Fees

New York's Martin Act Faces Test in Challenge to 2005 Case

Castille Testifies in Favor of 'Civil Gideon' Funding

Workers' Comp Judges Can't Fight Rescinded Raise
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Others Over Deepwater Oil Spill Disaster
  •      
    • Subscription Required

'Follow That Escapee!'

Judge Who Tossed Defense Counsel Accused of 'Partiality'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media