12.07.2015 Views

2006 MLRC/NAA/NAB LIBEL DEFENSE ... - Directrouter.com

2006 MLRC/NAA/NAB LIBEL DEFENSE ... - Directrouter.com

2006 MLRC/NAA/NAB LIBEL DEFENSE ... - Directrouter.com

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

For exclusive use of <strong>MLRC</strong> members and other parties specifically authorized by <strong>MLRC</strong>. © Media Law Resource Center, Inc.1. Name and Date of Publication:Lexington County Chronicle and Dispatch News, a series of publications betweenAugust and November 2002.2. Profile:a. Print X ; TV _____; other _____________________.b. Plaintiff: public X ; private _____.c. Newsgathering tort _____; Publication tort X .3. Case Summary:Plaintiff was executive director the Babcock Center, a private not-profit corporationthat received $40 million per year from the State of S.C. to provide residential andoccupational care for persons with disabilities and special needs relating to mental retardationand spinal cord injuries. The newspaper published a series of articles and editorialsdescribing instances of abuse, neglect and exploitation of the clients of Babcock after thepaper received a copy of a critical audit performed by the state agency with oversightresponsibility for the contract with Babcock. The plaintiff here sued contending that articlesreporting allegations by the Babcock board chair that the plaintiff and other Babcock officialshad failed or refused to report to the state ombudsman an incident that appeared to be therape of a 78-year old resident by a 16-year old resident. The board chair was a co-defendantwith the newspaper. In response to the newspaper’s pre-trial motion the court ruled that theplaintiff was a limited purpose public figure.4. Verdict:A verdict was directed in favor of both defendants at the close of the plaintiff’s caseon grounds that as a matter of law the reports were either true or that the plaintiff had failedto prove actual malice on the part of either defendant by clear and convincing proof.5. Length of Trial:Three days.6. Length of Deliberation:None.7. Size of Jury:Twelve.30

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!