预览加载中，请您耐心等待几秒...

ANDERSONv.liberty.doc

预览
1/5
2/5
3/5
4/5
5/5

在线预览结束，喜欢就下载吧，查找使用更方便

下载提示 文本预览

如果您无法下载资料，请参考说明：

1、部分资料下载需要金币，请确保您的账户上有足够的金币

2、已购买过的文档，再次下载不重复扣费

3、资料包下载后请先用软件解压，在使用对应软件打开

ANDERSONv.LIBERTYLOBBY,INC.,477U.S.242(1986). JusticeWhitedeliveredtheopinionoftheCourt. [§1] InNewYorkTimesCo.v.Sullivan,376U.S.254,279-280,84S.Ct.710,725-726,11L.Ed.2d686(1964),weheldthat,inalibelsuitbroughtbyapublicofficial,theFirstAmendmentrequirestheplaintifftoshowthatinpublishingthedefamatorystatementthedefendantactedwithactualmalice"withknowledgethatitwasfalseorwithrecklessdisregardofwhetheritwasfalseornot." Weheldfurtherthatsuchactualmalicemustbeshownwith"convincingclarity."Id.,at285-286,84S.Ct.,at728-729.SeealsoGertzv.RobertWelch,Inc.,418U.S.323,342,94S.Ct.2997,3008,41L.Ed.2d789(1974).TheseNewYorkTimesrequirementswehavesinceextendedtolibelsuitsbroughtbypublicfiguresaswell.See,e.g.,CurtisPublishingCo.v.Butts,388U.S.130,87S.Ct.1975,18L.Ed.2d1094(1967). [§2] Thiscasepresentsthequestionwhethertheclear-and-convincing-evidencerequirementmustbeconsideredbyacourtrulingonamotionforsummaryjudgmentunderRule56oftheFederalRulesofCivilProcedureinacasetowhichNewYorkTimesapplies TheUnitedStatesCourtofAppealsfortheDistrictofColumbiaCircuitheldthatthatrequirementneednotbeconsideredatthesummaryjudgmentstage.241U.S.App.D.C.246,746F.2d1563(1984).Wegrantedcertiorari,471U.S.1134,105S.Ct.2672,86L.Ed.2d691(1985),becausethatholdingwasinconflictwithdecisionsofseveralotherCourtsofAppeals,whichhadheldthattheNewYorkTimesrequirementofclearandconvincingevidencemustbeconsideredonamotionforsummaryjudgment.Wenowreverse. [§3] RespondentLibertyLobby,Inc.,isanot-for-profitcorporationandself-described"citizens'lobby."RespondentWillisCartoisitsfounderandtreasurer.InOctober1981,TheInvestigatormagazinepublishedtwoarticles:"ThePrivateWorldofWillisCarto"and"Yockey:ProfileofanAmericanHitler."Thesearticleswereintroducedbyathird,shorterarticleentitled"America'sNeo-NaziUnderground:DidMeinKampfSpawnYockey'sImperium,aBookRevivedbyCarto'sLibertyLobby?"Thesearticlesportrayedtherespondentsasneo-Nazi,anti-Semitic,racist,andFascist. [§4] RespondentsfiledthisdiversitylibelactionintheUnitedStatesDi