Melaleuca, Inc. v. Clark

How courts have described this case

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

• “the law of defamation and the law of injurious falsehood require that a plaintiff prove far more than the publication of a false statement”
• scientist’s comments about what testing results on defendant’s products showed were 26 actionable notwithstanding disclaimer that “opinions explained herein are based on [his] scientific 27 research”
• “a prior bad reputation is an appropriate ground for reducing damages”
• “if the imputation fairly implied 18 that the plaintiff is dishonest or lacking in integrity or that he is perpetrating a fraud upon the 19 public by selling something that he knows to be defective, the personal defamation may be 20 found”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).