McDermott v. Hughley

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the absolute privilege did not apply to a psychiatrist who, after meeting with a park police officer, issued a defamatory report because there were “insufficient procedural safeguards” during the meeting
• noting that whether consent in fact was given was properly a question for the jury’s consideration
• providing numerous examples in which we have determined the application of a qualified privilege to be appropriate
• listing examples of employer/employee cases and noting that \[a]n individual also has a qualified privilege to publish anything in his own interest protecting his own reputation against defamation\
• declining to extend privilege because of absence of procedural safeguards in the proceeding
• a person will not be held liable when acting in furtherance of a social interest of importance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).