Dixon v. Ogden Newspapers, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that evidence of a defendant's intentional omission misleading readers supports an actual malice finding
• concluding that evidence of a defendant’s intentional omission misleading readers supports an actual malice finding
• noting that plaintiff’s claim should fail unless defendant newspaper intentionally omitted relevant facts “in order to leave readers with the [false] impression” alleged
• noting that plaintiffs claim should fail unless defendant newspaper intentionally omitted relevant facts “in order to leave readers with the [false] impression” alleged

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).