5 Virginia opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2008 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Virginia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Ocala Star-Banner Co. v. Damrongreen2 sentences2005Ocala Star-Banner Co. v. Damron, 401 U.S. 295 , 299, 91 S.Ct. 628 , 28 L.Ed.2d 57 (1971) ("As the mayor ... the respondent ... was without question a `public official' within the meaning given the term in New York Times"). 2005Ocala Star-Banner Co. v. Damron, 401 U.S. 295 , 299, 91 S.Ct. 628 , 28 L.Ed.2d 57 (1971) ("As the mayor ... the respondent ... was without question a `public official' within the meaning given the term in New York Times"). | 2 | 2 |
Rusack v. Harshagreen1 sentence2008Considering all of these issues, the Rusach court found “He is, therefore, a public official, and, since the defamatory remarks dealt with his performance as such an official, the New York Times malice standard must be applied.” Rusach , at p. 299. | 1 | 1 |
Luper v. Black Dispatch Publishing Co.green1 sentence1987App. 3d 889, 893 , 321 N.E.2d 739, 742 (1974); Luper Black Dispatch Publishing Company, 675 P.2d 1028, 1030-31 (Okla. 1983); Johnston Corinthian Television Corp., 583 P.2d 1101, 1103 (Okla. 1978). | 1 | 1 |
Basarich v. Rodegherogreen2 sentences1987However, different considerations determine whether a person is a "public figure" or a "public official" under the New York Times malice rule. [3] The following cases lend support to the proposition that a public school teacher is a New York Times "public official." See Sewell Brookbank, 119 Ariz. 422, 425 , 581 P.2d 267, 270 (1978); Gallman Carnes, 254 Ark. 987, 992 , 497 S.W.2d 47, 50 (1973); Basarich Rodeghero, 24 Ill. 1987App. 3d 889, 893 , 321 N.E.2d 739, 742 (1974); Luper Black Dispatch Publishing Company, 675 P.2d 1028, 1030-31 (Okla. 1983); Johnston Corinthian Television Corp., 583 P.2d 1101, 1103 (Okla. 1978). | 1 | 1 |
Sewell v. Brookbankgreen2 sentences1987However, different considerations determine whether a person is a "public figure" or a "public official" under the New York Times malice rule. [3] The following cases lend support to the proposition that a public school teacher is a New York Times "public official." See Sewell Brookbank, 119 Ariz. 422, 425 , 581 P.2d 267, 270 (1978); Gallman Carnes, 254 Ark. 987, 992 , 497 S.W.2d 47, 50 (1973); Basarich Rodeghero, 24 Ill. 1987However, different considerations determine whether a person is a "public figure" or a "public official" under the New York Times malice rule. [3] The following cases lend support to the proposition that a public school teacher is a New York Times "public official." See Sewell Brookbank, 119 Ariz. 422, 425 , 581 P.2d 267, 270 (1978); Gallman Carnes, 254 Ark. 987, 992 , 497 S.W.2d 47, 50 (1973); Basarich Rodeghero, 24 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Johnston v. Corinthian Television Corp.green1 sentence1987App. 3d 889, 893 , 321 N.E.2d 739, 742 (1974); Luper Black Dispatch Publishing Company, 675 P.2d 1028, 1030-31 (Okla. 1983); Johnston Corinthian Television Corp., 583 P.2d 1101, 1103 (Okla. 1978). | 1 | 1 |
Gallman v. Carnesgreen2 sentences1987However, different considerations determine whether a person is a "public figure" or a "public official" under the New York Times malice rule. [3] The following cases lend support to the proposition that a public school teacher is a New York Times "public official." See Sewell Brookbank, 119 Ariz. 422, 425 , 581 P.2d 267, 270 (1978); Gallman Carnes, 254 Ark. 987, 992 , 497 S.W.2d 47, 50 (1973); Basarich Rodeghero, 24 Ill. 1987However, different considerations determine whether a person is a "public figure" or a "public official" under the New York Times malice rule. [3] The following cases lend support to the proposition that a public school teacher is a New York Times "public official." See Sewell Brookbank, 119 Ariz. 422, 425 , 581 P.2d 267, 270 (1978); Gallman Carnes, 254 Ark. 987, 992 , 497 S.W.2d 47, 50 (1973); Basarich Rodeghero, 24 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Newspaper Publishing Corp. v. Burkegreen2 sentences1985“In Rosenbloom and Sanders, the relevant test was not the status of the plaintiff involved but rather the events which were the subject of the publication.” Newspaper Publishing Corp. v. Burke, 216 Va. 800, 803 , 224 S.E.2d 132, 135 (1976). 1985“In Rosenbloom and Sanders, the relevant test was not the status of the plaintiff involved but rather the events which were the subject of the publication.” Newspaper Publishing Corp. v. Burke, 216 Va. 800, 803 , 224 S.E.2d 132, 135 (1976). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.
green
1 sentence2005Gertz, 418 U.S. at 349-50 . 8 As mayor of the City and an incumbent candidate for City Council, Kollman is a "public official" required to meet the New York Times malice standard. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
green
2 sentences1987New York Times 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' -- that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." 376 U.S. at 279-80 . 1987New York Times 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’ — that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.” 376 U.S. at 279-80 . | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.