Lester v. Powers

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the plaintiffs proposed inference of actual malice was “unsupported speculation” and inadequate to survive a defendant’s motion for summary judgment
• concluding that the plaintiff’s proposed inference of actual malice was “unsupported speculation” and inadequate to survive a defendant’s motion for summary judgment
• concluding that the plaintiff’s proposed inference of actual malice was “unsupported speculation” and inadequate to survive a defendant’s motion for summary judgment
• holding that the defendant was entitled to summary judgment when the record does not show what statements were made, or when, where, or how they were made
• stating that defamatory statement must be \of and concerning\ the plaintiff
• noting Maine common law requires defamation plaintiff to demonstrate negligence on the part of the defendant, citing Restatement (Second)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).