Weil v. Simmons

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that statement was nonactionable because readers could review facts upon which opinion was based to determine whether they agreed with it
• concluding that 5 phrase “journalistic scum of the earth” could not reasonably be understood as assertion of fact because the phrase “was no more than rhetorical hyperbole” that “[e]ven the most careless reader must have perceived” was not meant literally (quotation and brackets omitted)
• explaining that allegedly defamatory statements “were opinions and therefore within the [F]irst [A]mendment protection”
• Pease had engaged in “journalistic smear,” was “journalistic scum of the earth”
• \I do feel\ signals opinion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).