Friedman v. Boston Broadcasters, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• calling plaintiffs “insurance crooks,” who engaged in “insurance fraud” was likely to be considered a statement of opinion rather than fact
• callingplaintiffs “insurance crooks,” who engaged in “insurance fraud” was likely to be considered a statement of opinion rather than fact
• issue of material fact whether broadcaster made sufficient investigation of plaintiff’s records before broadcasting defamatory falsehood, where records tended to refute or undercut key facts reported in news story
• “These were statements about a matter of public concern, and therefore ... in order for them to be the basis of a recovery from this media defendant, the plaintiffs must prove not only that the statements were defamatory, but also that they were false”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).