Sullivan vs new york times summary. In new york times co. Sixty well known americans signed it. Sullivan respondent damages in a civil libel action.
This is an extraordinarily important democratic right and is particularly valuable at times of political controversy and polarization. The alabama supreme court of upheld a judgment awarding the respondent lb. The alabama court ruled in favor of sullivan finding that the newspaper ad falsely represented the police department and sullivan.
Sullivan 1964 brennan created the right to be wrongthe speech and press rule stipulating that even false statements about public officials should be entitled to protection under the first and fourteenth amendments of the constitution of the united states unless. The petitioner the new york times petitioner appealed. It was 1960 and the civil rights movement was gaining strength.
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. Sullivan took offense to the ad and sued the new york times in an alabama court. Specifically the case involved an advertisement that appeared in the new york times in march 1960 that outlined how african americans.
The police commissioner l. 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. 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.
Sullivan which was a landmark decision regarding freedom of the press. Synopsis of rule of law. 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. New york times co. Sullivan argued that the ad had damaged his reputation and he had been libeled.
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. The trial court told the jury that the article contained statements which constituted slander per se and sullivan was awarded 500000 in damages.
Sullivan legal case in which on march 9 1964 the us. A jury in state court awarded him 500000 in damages. In this lesson well learn about new york times v.
The ad described what it called an unprecedented wave of terror of police actions against peaceful demonstrators in montgomery alabama. Case summary for new york times co. Simply put new york times v.
Sullivan was a public official who brought a claim against new york times co.