Lluberes v. UNCOMMON PRODUCTIONS, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that conduct that “went well beyond any reasonable measure of self-defense” could not be protected by the privilege of reply
• concluding that plaintiffs were limited purpose public figures where they “enjoyed access to the press and exploited it by orchestrating a PR blitz to garner public support and mute their critics”
• “[A]n individual should not risk being branded with an unfavorable status determination merely because he defends himself publicly against accusations.”
• “[A]n individual should not risk being branded with an unfavorable status determination merely because he defends himself publicly against accusations.”
• first quoting , 129 F.3d 681, 684 (1st Cir. 1997) then , 348 F.3d at 22
• “When the parties agree on the substantive law that should govern, ‘we may hold the parties to their plausible choice of law, whether or not that choice is correct.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).