Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Rosenbloom Vs. Metromedia

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 07, 1971

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

63 entries 13 linked 50 unlinked
Show
  1. Time, Inc. Vs. Hill US Supreme Court · Jan 09, 1967
  2. Thornhill Vs. Alabama US Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1940
    Relied / Followed
  3. New York Times Co. Vs. Sullivan US Supreme Court · Mar 09, 1964
  4. Griswold Vs. Connecticut US Supreme Court · Jun 07, 1965
  5. St. Amant Vs. Thompson US Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1968
  6. Garrison Vs. Louisiana US Supreme Court · Nov 23, 1964
  7. Jacobellis Vs. Ohio US Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1964
  8. Ocala Star-banner Co. Vs. Damron US Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1971
  9. Monitor Patriot Co. Vs. Roy US Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1971
    Relied / Followed
  10. Time, Inc. Vs. Pape US Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1971
  11. Rosenblatt Vs. Baer US Supreme Court · Feb 21, 1966
  12. Associated Press Vs. Walker US Supreme Court · Oct 16, 1967
  13. Speiser Vs. Randall US Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1958
  14. U.S. 29 (1971) U.S. Supreme Court Rosenbloom v. Metromedia
    Search
  15. U.S. 29 (1971) Rosenbloom v. Metromedia
    Search
  16. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
    Search
  17. in which THE CHIEF JUSTICE and MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN join. In a series of cases beginning with New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
    Search
  18. of matter which tends to harm a person's reputation and expose him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule. Schnabel v. Meredith
    Search
  19. Pennsylvania law recognizes truth as a complete defense to a libel action. Schonek v. WJAC
    Search
  20. made by high state officials, even if published with an improper motive, actual malice, or knowing falsity. Montgomery v. Philadelphia
    Search
  21. purpose of causing harm to the person defamed, even though the official information is false or inaccurate. Sciandra v. Lynett
    Search
  22. Purcell v. Westinghouse
    Search
  23. against the background of the functions of the constitutional guarantees for freedom of expression. Rosenblatt v. Baer
    Search
  24. Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts
    Search
  25. cases reiterate this judgment that the First Amendment extends to myriad matters of public interest. In Time, Inc. v. Hill
    Search
  26. of a college football game was a public issue. Associated Press v. Walker
    Search
  27. and redressing attacks upon reputation. We have recognized the force of petitioner's arguments, Time, Inc. v. Hill
    Search
  28. or public figure is a minor functionary, or has left the position that put him in the public eye, see Rosenblatt v. Baer
    Search
  29. from unwarranted intrusion, and, second, a desire to preserve his public good name and reputation. See Rosenblatt v. Baer
    Search
  30. publish defamatory material from an improper motive, with actual malice, and with knowledge of its falsity. Montgomery v. Philadelphia
    Search
  31. defamatory material originally published under the absolute privileges listed above, if done accurately. Sciandra v. Linett
    Search
  32. inevitably cause self-censorship, and thus create the danger that the legitimate utterance will be deterred. Cf. Speer v. Randall
    Search
  33. when sought to be applied to the Page 403 U. S. 51 conduct of a political campaign. Monitor Patriot Co. v. Roy
    Search
  34. thereby keeping protected discussion from public cognizance. Speiser v. Randall
    Search
  35. U.S. at 357 U. S. 526 . Cf. Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University
    Search
  36. an excursion into factfinding in this area simply because it is time-consuming or difficult. We stated in Pennekamp v. Florida
    Search
  37. compel this Court's de novo review. See Edwards v. South
    Search
  38. Associated Press v. Walker
    Search
  39. Beckley Newspapers Corp. v. Hanks
    Search
  40. Greenbelt Publishing Assn. v. Bresler
    Search
  41. U. S. 279 (1971) (police official against publisher of magazine). However, Rosenblatt v. Baer
    Search
  42. and Linn v. Plant
    Search
  43. U. S. 53 (1966), involved an action by an official of an employer against a labor union. Garrison v. Louisiana
    Search
  44. school teacher based on false statements made by the teacher in discussing issues of public importance. Pickering v. Board
    Search
  45. for invasion of privacy based on false statements where, again, a matter of public interest was involved. Time, Inc. v. Hill
    Search
  46. not to the constitutional standard of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
    Search
  47. U.S. Supreme Court Rosenbloom v. Metromedia
    Search
  48. the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
    Search
  49. Schnabel v. Meredith
    Search
  50. Schonek v. WJAC
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial