Skip to main content

Yetman v. English

Citations

  • 811 P.2d 323
  • 168 Ariz. 71
  • 85 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 12
  • 1991 Ariz. LEXIS 37

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a statement of opinion is protected only if: (1) it could not reasonably be interpreted as stating actual fact; or (2) it is not provable as false
  • holding that jury should determine whether ambiguous statements are fact or opinion
  • stating that defamation case may proceed to the jury “only where there are truly two tenable views” of the statement at issue
  • noting that statements are not actionable “[i]f interpreted as nothing more than rhetorical political invective”
  • acknowledging considerable body of federal law, emanating from Gertz dictum, “holding that the expression of opinion is absolutely privileged under the first amendment”
  • explaining that “assertions [that] employ ‘loose, 8 figurative or hyperbolic language’ . . . cannot reasonably be interpreted as stating or 9 implying actual facts” (quoting Milkovich v. Lorain J. Co., 497 U.S. 1, 21 (1990)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Feldman, Cameron, Corcoran, Moeller, Jacobson, Gordon, Arizona

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

27 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

36 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Yetman v. English

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.