Neal Horsley v. Geraldo Rivera

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an accusation that the plaintiff was an “accomplice to murder” was not actionable because it was made during an “emotional debate concerning emotionally-charged issues of significant public concern,” specifically regarding abortion
• having alleged that defendant defamed plaintiff by stating he is chargeable with a felony, plaintiff is bound by that construction of the statements
• examining spe- cific context by comparing defendant’s statements with plain- tiff’s, where allegedly defamatory statement was made during television talk show appearance
• discussing “the reality that exaggeration and non-literal commentary have become an integral part of social discourse” (quoting Levinsky’s, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 127 F.3d 122, 128 (1st Cir. 1997))
• reasonable viewer would have understood defendant’s use of phrase “accomplice to murder” as an expression of outrage, and not an accusation of the commission of a crime
• when doctor who performed abortions was murdered, television host’s calling anti- abortionist an “accomplice to murder” was rhetorical hyperbole; no reasonable viewer would conclude host was literally contending that activist could be charged with murder

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).