Usually, the federal constitutional privilege that protects accurate reports of judicial proceedings (and liberal use of the word “allegedly”) is enough to ward off defamation suits, no matter how unhappy the subject of a story may be. But not always.
April 25, 2019 at 02:25 PM
1 minute read
Editor and columnist at The Litigation Daily
Writing about litigation can be tricky, especially when the proceedings involve ugly personal accusations and sealed court filings. The line between protected content and defamation is sometimes a bit blurry.
A pair of decisions issued yesterday—one in New York involving a former Big Law associate versus the New York Post, the other in Florida pitting a former CNN pundit/Donald Trump staffer against Gizmodo Media —are both good examples.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
Duane Morris seeks an associate with 3-4 years of experience to join its Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation Group in its Philadelp...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
