Lowe v. Hearst Communications, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that it had “declined to get involved in deciding the newsworthiness of specific details in a newsworthy story where the details were ‘substantially related’ to the story.” (quoting Cinel v. Connick, 15 F.3d 1338, 1346 (5th Cir. 1994))
• stating “there is legitimate public interest in facts tending to support an allegation of criminal activity, even if the prosecutor does not intend to pursue a conviction”
• stating “there is legitimate public interest in facts tending to support an allegation of criminal activity, even if the prosecutor does not intend to pursue a conviction”
• declining to “circumscribe the paper’s coverage in this case by imposing judicial rules on what is relevant and appropriate in a story that is based on very personal [details], which became newsworthy by their connection to the alleged crimes”
• “[Tjhere is a legitimate public interest in facts tending to support an allegation of criminal activity, even if the prosecutor does not intend to pursue a conviction.”
• “All court records are presumptively available to the public and may be sealed only pursuant to the conditions of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 76a.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).