Com. v. Haslam, B., Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the D.C. Circuit has on occasion even “defined controversies as being broader than the narrower discussion contained in the defamatory document” (emphasis added)
• explaining that summary judgment requires more than “purportedly credible evidence that contradicts [the speaker’s] story” (citation omitted)
• finding that a “disclosure” which cuts against author’s perspective “tend[s] to dispel any claim of actual malice”
• stating that the “court does not consider the merits of such underdeveloped arguments”
• “[The author] had not discovered anything that caused him to doubt his conclusion about [the plaintiff], and therefore was under no obligation to' investigate further.”
• “[I]t is not enough to show that defendant should have known better; instead, the plaintiff must offer evidence that the defendant in fact harbored subjective doubt.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).