Lundquist v. Reusser

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that statements by defendant at seminar to persons interested in horse breeding were made upon privileged occasion under § 47(c)
• explaining that plaintiff bears the burden of proving that a statement was made with malice once defendant establishes that the statement was privileged
• recognizing relationship between malice and reprehensibility
• statements made at “a seminar to persons sharing a common interest in horse breeding, were made upon a ‘privileged occasion’ for purposes of the common-interest privilege”
• conditional privileges which California does recognize are lost “if the person making the statement was ... Motivated by hatred or ill-will toward the plaintiff which induced the publication; or ... [w]as without a good-faith belief in the truth of the statement”
• “We recognize that, the Locke decision, by its terms, dealt only with the question of which party bore the burden of pleading malice, and did not address specifically the question of which party bore the burden of proof with regard to malice.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).