New york times vs sullivan summary. Case summary for new york times co. New york times co. Specifically the case involved an advertisement that appeared in the new york times in march 1960 that outlined how african americans.
A jury in state court awarded him 500000 in damages. As under the doctrine of new york times v. New york times co.
Supreme court ruled unanimously 90 that for a libel suit to be successful the complainant must prove that the offending statement was made with actual malicethat is with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not. In europe a finding of liability for the defamation of a public figure does not. 2d 83 1964 brief fact summary.
Sullivan sullivan was also suing over the same ad but instead of the new york times he was suing four of the african american preachers who had helped finance the ad one of whom was abernathy. Synopsis of rule of law. Sullivan legal case in which on march 9 1964 the us.
New york times co. The supreme court of the united states held that a public official could not recover damages in a defamation action absent a showing of actual malice. Sullivan 1964 plaintiffs who are public figures cannot win unless they prove that the libeler acted with actual malice that he knowingly asserted a false statement.
254 was a landmark decision of the us supreme court ruling that the freedom of speech protections in the first amendment to the us. The alabama supreme court of upheld a judgment awarding the respondent lb. Sullivan respondent damages in a civil libel action.
New york times co. Specifically it held that if a plaintiff in a defamation lawsuit is a public official or person running for public office not only must he or she prove the normal elements of defamationpublication of a false defamatory statement. It was 1960 and the civil rights movement was gaining strength.
Sixty well known americans signed it. Sullivan was a public official who brought a claim against new york times co. Sullivan is important because it protects the press and the publics right to criticize public officials in the conduct of their duties.
When the times refused and claimed that they were puzzled by the request sullivan filed his libel action against the times and a group of african american ministers mentioned in the ad. Civil rights leaders ran a full page ad in the new york times to raise funds to help civil rights leaders including martin luther king jr. The ad described what it called an unprecedented wave of terror of police actions against peaceful demonstrators in montgomery alabama.
The trial court told the jury that the article contained statements which constituted slander per se and sullivan was awarded 500000 in damages.