No. 21-298

Bobby Wilson v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc., et al.

Lower Court: Arizona
Docketed: 2021-08-30
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: context defamation false-publication first-amendment freedom-of-press freedom-of-speech malice media-liability speech-protection
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2021-10-08
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is a fabricated publication sufficient proof of malice?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Isa per se false publication that was proven fabricated solely by the defendant sufficient proof alone of malice? Liability for the publication of information known to be false does not abridge freedom of speech or press. Herbert v. Lando, 441 U.S. 158, 171-72 (1979). It follows therefore, “that unless the publication in the instant case was privileged or qualifiedly privileged, the proof of publication carries the presumption of its falsity and of malice toward the plaintiff.” Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 314 (1970). 2. Ifthe libel defendants use their proven fabricated articles to engage in a vendetta to destroy a candidate’s reputation is that not sufficient proof of malice in and of itself and is no longer protected speech? The context of the libelous articles becomes important in determination of the existence of malice. Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Human Rel. Comm’n, 413 U.S. 376 (1973). Ou ye ay

Docket Entries

2021-10-12
Petition DENIED.
2021-09-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/8/2021.
2021-09-16
Waiver of right of respondent Phoenix Newspapers, et al. to respond filed.
2021-08-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 29, 2021)

Attorneys

Bobby Wilson
Bobby Wilson — Petitioner
Bobby Wilson — Petitioner
Phoenix Newspapers, et al.
David Jeremy BodneyBallard Spahr LLP, Respondent
David Jeremy BodneyBallard Spahr LLP, Respondent