If a correction is demanded within the period prescribed by section 12-653.02, and is not published or broadcast in substantially as conspicuous a manner in the newspaper or magazine, or on the radio or television broadcasting station, as the statements claimed to be libelous, in a regular issue thereof published or broadcast within three weeks after service, plaintiff, if he pleads and proves the notice, demand and failure to correct, and if his cause of action is maintained, may recover general, special and exemplary damages subject to applicable rules of law governing such damages in this jurisdiction, but no exemplary damages may be recovered unless the plaintiff proves that defendant made the publication or broadcast with actual malice and then only in the discretion of the court or jury.
Notes of Decisions
Boswell v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc., 730 P.2d 178 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 8× “[5] It is argued that under A.R.S. § 12-653.03, when a correction is demanded but not published, a plaintiff can recover "general, special and exemplary damages subject to applicable rules of law governing such damages in this jurisdiction .”
Boswell v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc., 730 P.2d 186 (Ariz. 1986).
· cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 12-653.03. 3 As the court of appeals noted, the statutes apparently do not allow recovery for emotional distress under any circumstances.”
Orca Commc'ns v. Ann Noder Et vir/pitch Pub., 337 P.3d 545 (Ariz. 2014).
· cites it 2× “AR.S. §§ 12-653.03 (permitting an award of punitive damages “subject to applicable rules of law governing such damages in this jurisdiction”), - 701(B) (requiring proof “by clear and convincing evidence” for an award of punitive damages).”
Boswell v. Superior Court, Etc., 609 P.2d 577 (Ariz. 1980).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-653.03 provides in pertinent part that if a correction is demanded and is not published “in substantially as conspicuous a manner” in the newspaper, the plaintiff may recover general, special and exemplary damages.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.