16 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi 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 |
|---|---|---|
Moon v. Condere Corp.green2 sentences2010Moon v. Condere Corp., 690 So.2d 1191, 1196-97 (Miss.1997). 2009Moon v. Condere Corp., 690 So. 2d 1191, 1196-97 (Miss. 1997). | 2 | 2 |
Blake v. Gannett Co., Inc.green2 sentences1994"A defamation claim requires that the plaintiff prove, among other things, 'fault amounting to at least negligence on the part of the publisher'." Id. (quoting Blake v. Gannett Co., Inc., 529 So. 2d 595, 602 (Miss.1988). 1989Blake v. Gannett Co., Inc., 529 So.2d 595, 602 (Miss. 1988). | 2 | 2 |
Moeller v. American Guar. and Liability Ins. Co.green2 sentences2002The Court reasoned that because Fuselier was "being defended under the defamation claim with a reservation of rights, American Guarantee was obligated to let them select their own attorney at American Guarantee's cost to represent them." Id. at 1071 . 1992The Court reasoned that because Fuselier was "being defended under the defamation claim with a reservation of rights, American Guarantee was obligated to let them select their own attorney at American Guarantee's cost to represent them." Id. at 1071 . | 1 | 3 |
McCullough v. Cookgreen2 sentences2018More recently, in McCullough v. Cook , 679 So.2d 627 (Miss. 1996), the Supreme Court considered a defamation claim based on a sheriff's statement to a reporter that a truck with a particular license tag number had been confiscated in a drug bust. 2018See id. at 630-31 . | 1 | 1 |
Lee v. Memorial Hosp. at Gulfportgreen2 sentences2012See Lee, 999 So.2d at 1267 (¶ 12). 2012See also Price, 21 So.3d at 520 (¶ 20) (finding that substantial compliance, not strict compliance, is the applicable standard for addressing whether the contents of a notice-of-claim letter complied with the MTCA); Lee v. Mem'l Hosp. at Gulfport, 999 So.2d 1263, 1266-67 (¶¶ 9-13) (Miss.2008) (finding statutory notice required under the MTCA as to delivery of notice and contents of notice, while not a question of fact, but one of law, is a fact-sensitive question). .In order to establish a defamation claim, an ordinary plaintiff is required to show the following: (1) “a false and defamatory st | 1 | 1 |
Chalk v. Bertholfgreen2 sentences2012Franklin v. Thompson, 722 So.2d 688, 692 (¶ 12) (Miss.1998) (citations omitted); cf. Chalk v. Bertholf, 980 So.2d 290, 296 (¶¶ 11-12) (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (looking to four elements of a defamation claim to determine whether plaintiffs sufficiently pled defamation under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 8). ¶ 19. 2012Franklin v. Thompson, 722 So.2d 688, 692 (¶ 12) (Miss.1998) (citations omitted); cf. Chalk v. Bertholf, 980 So.2d 290, 296 (¶¶ 11-12) (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (looking to four elements of a defamation claim to determine whether plaintiffs sufficiently pled defamation under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 8). ¶ 19. | 1 | 1 |
Speed v. Scottgreen1 sentence2012To prove defamation under Mississippi law, the plaintiffs must demonstrate the following elements: (a) a false statement that has the capacity to injure the plaintiff’s reputation; (b) an unprivileged publication, i.e., communication to a third party; (c) negligence or greater fault on part of publisher; and (d) “either actionability of statement irrespective of special harm or existence of special harm caused by publication.” Speed v. Scott, 787 So.2d 626, 631 (1121) (Miss.2001) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Price v. Clarkgreen1 sentence2012See also Price, 21 So.3d at 520 (¶ 20) (finding that substantial compliance, not strict compliance, is the applicable standard for addressing whether the contents of a notice-of-claim letter complied with the MTCA); Lee v. Mem'l Hosp. at Gulfport, 999 So.2d 1263, 1266-67 (¶¶ 9-13) (Miss.2008) (finding statutory notice required under the MTCA as to delivery of notice and contents of notice, while not a question of fact, but one of law, is a fact-sensitive question). .In order to establish a defamation claim, an ordinary plaintiff is required to show the following: (1) “a false and defamatory st | 1 | 1 |
Franklin v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2012Franklin v. Thompson, 722 So.2d 688, 692 (¶ 12) (Miss.1998) (citations omitted); cf. Chalk v. Bertholf, 980 So.2d 290, 296 (¶¶ 11-12) (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (looking to four elements of a defamation claim to determine whether plaintiffs sufficiently pled defamation under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 8). ¶ 19. 2012Franklin v. Thompson, 722 So.2d 688, 692 (¶ 12) (Miss.1998) (citations omitted); cf. Chalk v. Bertholf, 980 So.2d 290, 296 (¶¶ 11-12) (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (looking to four elements of a defamation claim to determine whether plaintiffs sufficiently pled defamation under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 8). ¶ 19. | 1 | 1 |
Journal Pub. Co. v. McCulloughgreen2 sentences2012See also Price, 21 So.3d at 520 (¶ 20) (finding that substantial compliance, not strict compliance, is the applicable standard for addressing whether the contents of a notice-of-claim letter complied with the MTCA); Lee v. Mem'l Hosp. at Gulfport, 999 So.2d 1263, 1266-67 (¶¶ 9-13) (Miss.2008) (finding statutory notice required under the MTCA as to delivery of notice and contents of notice, while not a question of fact, but one of law, is a fact-sensitive question). .In order to establish a defamation claim, an ordinary plaintiff is required to show the following: (1) “a false and defamatory st 2012"This Court has described a defamatory statement as 'any written or printed language which tends to injure one’s reputation, and thereby expose him to public hatred, contempt or ridicule, degrade him in society, lessen him in public esteem or lower him in the confidence of the community.’ ” Id. at 360 (¶ 24) (quoting Fulton v. Miss. | 1 | 1 |
Armistead v. Minorgreen1 sentence2008Armistead v. Minor, 815 So.2d 1189, 1193 (¶ 7) (Miss.2002). ¶ 21. | 1 | 1 |
Skrmetta v. Bayview Yacht Club, Inc.green1 sentence2006Skrmetta v. Bayview Yacht Club, Inc., 806 So.2d 1120, 1126-27 (¶ 24) (Miss. 2002). ¶ 47. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mallette v. CHURCH OF GOD INTERN.
green
2 sentences2005In Mallette v. Church of God Int'l, 789 So.2d 120 (Miss.Ct.App.2001), the Mississippi Court of Appeals rejected the defendant's request to distinguish between intentional and other types of torts, explaining: A civil court is forbidden, under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, from becoming involved in ecclesiastical disputes. 2003In Mallette v. Church of God Int’l, 789 So. 2d 120 (Miss. | 2 | 2003–2005 |
Richard v. Supervalu, Inc.
green
1 sentence2018A defamation claim consists of four elements: “(1) a false and defamatory statement concerning the plaintiff, (2) an unprivileged publication to a third party, (3) fault amounting to at least negligence on the part of the publisher, and (4) either actionability irrespective of special harm or existence of special harm caused by the publication.” Id. at (¶20). ¶18. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Staheli v. Smith
green
1 sentence1994"A defamation claim requires that the plaintiff prove, among other things, 'fault amounting to at least negligence on the part of the publisher'." Id. (quoting Blake v. Gannett Co., Inc., 529 So. 2d 595, 602 (Miss.1988). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Donald B. Rinsley, M.D. v. Anthony Brandt and William Morrow and Company, Inc., a Corporation
green
1 sentence1986Thus, in a false light privacy action, as in a defamation action, truth is an absolute defense. 700 F.2d at 1307 . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
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.