SUBCHAPTER D
DEFAMATION
Sec.
8341. Single publication limitation.
8342. Justification a defense.
8343. Burden of proof.
8344. Malice or negligence necessary to support award of damages.
8345. No liability when without power of censorship.
§ 8341. Single publication limitation.
(a) Short title of section.--This section shall be known and may be cited as the "Uniform Single Publication Act."
(b) General rule.--No person shall have more than one cause of action for damages for libel or slander,
or invasion of privacy, or any other tort founded upon any single publication, or
exhibition, or utterance, such as any one edition of a newspaper, or book, or magazine,
or any one presentation to an audience, or any one broadcast over radio or television,
or any one exhibition of a motion picture. Recovery in any action shall include all
damages for any such tort suffered by the plaintiff in all jurisdictions.
(c) Bar by judgment.--A judgment in any jurisdiction for or against the plaintiff upon the substantive merits
of any action for damages founded upon a single publication, or exhibition, or utterance,
as described in subsection (b), shall bar any other action for damages by the same
plaintiff against the same defendant founded upon the same publication, or exhibition,
or utterance.
Notes of Decisions
Ghrist v. CBS Broad., Inc., 40 F. Supp. 3d 623 (W.D. Pa. 2014).
· cites it 2× “As for this rule’s application to the internet, our Court of Appeals has explained that “[w]ebsites are constantly linked and updated.”
Kahan v. Slippery Rock Univ., 50 F. Supp. 3d 667 (W.D. Pa. 2014).
“§ 951-963 (the “PHRA”), and Pennsylvania common law claims of promissory estoppel, intentional interference with contract, and malicious prosecution, as well as a statutory defamation claim pursuant to 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8341 . Kahan seeks injunctive and declaratory relief,…”
Bailey v. Dell Pub. Co., Inc., 790 F. Supp. 101 (W.D. Pa. 1992).
“Further, 42 Pa.Cons. Stat.Ann. § 8341(b) codifies the single publication rule and provides in relevant part: No person shall have more than one cause of action for damages for libel or slander, or invasion of privacy, or any other tort founded upon any single publication .”
In Re Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC, 450 B.R. 99 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2011).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 8341(b). The purpose of Pennsylvania’s single publication rule is to protect publishers from multitude of lawsuits based on one tortious act.”
Fox v. Smith, Appeal of: Smith, S. (Pa. 2021).
· cites it 2× “142 (codified at 42 Pa.C.S. §8341). 5 Consistent with Appellee’s position, we find no basis in the record presented to support Appellants’ contention that alleged injury to Appellee in Philadelphia County is de minimis or insubstantial.”
Fox v. Smith, Appeal of: Pascale & Baum (Pa. 2021).
· cites it 2× “142 (codified at 42 Pa.C.S. §8341). 5 Consistent with Appellee’s position, we find no basis in the record presented to support Appellants’ contention that alleged injury to Appellee in Philadelphia County is de minimis or insubstantial.”
Fox v. Smith, Appeal of: Luongo, E. (Pa. 2021).
· cites it 2× “142 (codified at 42 Pa.C.S. §8341). 5 Consistent with Appellee’s position, we find no basis in the record presented to support Appellants’ contention that alleged injury to Appellee in Philadelphia County is de minimis or insubstantial.”
Fox v. Smith, Appeal of: Agostinelli & Baum (Pa. 2021).
· cites it 2× “142 (codified at 42 Pa.C.S. §8341). 5 Consistent with Appellee’s position, we find no basis in the record presented to support Appellants’ contention that alleged injury to Appellee in Philadelphia County is de minimis or insubstantial.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8341(b) — 8 cases
Ghrist v. CBS Broad., Inc., 40 F. Supp. 3d 623 (W.D. Pa. 2014).
“As for this rule’s application to the internet, our Court of Appeals has explained that “[w]ebsites are constantly linked and updated.”
Bailey v. Dell Pub. Co., Inc., 790 F. Supp. 101 (W.D. Pa. 1992).
“Further, 42 Pa.Cons. Stat.Ann. § 8341(b) codifies the single publication rule and provides in relevant part: No person shall have more than one cause of action for damages for libel or slander, or invasion of privacy, or any other tort founded upon any single publication .”
In Re Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC, 450 B.R. 99 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2011).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 8341(b). The purpose of Pennsylvania’s single publication rule is to protect publishers from multitude of lawsuits based on one tortious act.”
Fox v. Smith, Appeal of: Smith, S. (Pa. 2021).
“142 (codified at 42 Pa.C.S. §8341). 5 Consistent with Appellee’s position, we find no basis in the record presented to support Appellants’ contention that alleged injury to Appellee in Philadelphia County is de minimis or insubstantial.”
Fox v. Smith, Appeal of: Pascale & Baum (Pa. 2021).
“142 (codified at 42 Pa.C.S. §8341). 5 Consistent with Appellee’s position, we find no basis in the record presented to support Appellants’ contention that alleged injury to Appellee in Philadelphia County is de minimis or insubstantial.”
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.