AMCOR Investment Corp. v. Cox Arizona Publications Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• \It could hardly be otherwise in view of the constitutional basis for the protection of opinion.\
• “[I]t is important here that the primary target of Jennings’ ire was the city council, not AMCOR.”
• “[C]ourts give great weight to the context in which the statements are made.”
• “[W]hen the complaint implicates the fundamental value of freedom of the press, there is good reason for a court to examine the complaint with a more rigorous eye in order not to burden public debate with insupportable litigation.”
• “There was no allegation or even an implication that AMCOR was guilty of illegal or criminal conduct. . . . [I]t is important here that the primary target of Jennings’ ire was the city council, not AMCOR.”
• “[W]e might well use ‘argument’ as a synonym for ‘opinion’ since we deal with the question whether the words complained of were part of an attempt by the defendants to persuade their readers that a governmental act by the city council was wrong.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).