Citation network
Mcdonald Vs. Smith
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 19, 1985
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
-
U.S. 479 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court McDonald v. SmithSearch
-
U.S. 479 (1985) McDonald v. SmithSearch
-
absolute immunity from damages for libel. In 1845, this Court, after reviewing the common law, held in White v. NichollsSearch
-
as defined in terms that the North Carolina Court of Appeals considered to be consistent with New York Times Co. v. SullivanSearch
-
not grant absolute immunity from liability for libel. The Fourth Circuit, relying on this Court's decision in White v. NichollsSearch
-
as the other guarantees of that Amendment, and is an assurance of a particular freedom of expression. In United States v. CruikshankSearch
-
privilege afforded expressions in petitions to government officials. The plaintiff in the Vermont case of Harris v. HuntingtonSearch
-
but was not followed by the courts of other States. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. ClappSearch
-
Mass. 163, 169 (1808). Indeed, Justice Yeates of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania stated in Gray v. PentlandSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Id. at 25 (emphasis in original). In White v. NichollsSearch
-
California Motor Transport Co. v. TruckingSearch
-
U. S. 64 , 379 U. S. 75 (1964), and may, as in White v. NichollsSearch
-
the same ideals of liberty and democracy that gave us the freedoms to speak, publish, and assemble. See Mine Workers v. IllinoisSearch
-
Bar Assn., 389 U. S. 217 , 389 U. S. 222 (1967). These First Amendment rights are inseparable, Thomas v. CollinsSearch
-
defined by the Court of Appeals of North Carolina, in terms that court considered consistent with New York Times Co. v. SullivanSearch
-
Dellinger v. BelkSearch
-
doctrine. See Nixon v. FitzgeraldSearch
-
See Lake v. KingSearch
-
Wms. Saund. 131, 85 Eng.Rep. 137 (K.B. 1680). In White v. NichollsSearch
-
How. 266, 44 U. S. 289 (1845), this Court described Lake v. KingSearch
-
JUSTICE BRENNAN, with whom JUSTICE MARSHALL and JUSTICE BLACKMUN join, concurring. New York Times Co. v. SullivanSearch
-
Mine Workers v. IllinoisSearch
-
De Jonge v. OregonSearch
-
Chaplinsky v. NewSearch
-
to, and frequently as overlapping with, the First Amendment's other guarantees of free expression. See, e.g., NAACP v. ClaiborneSearch
-
Adderley v. FloridaSearch
-
Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
the scope of the Petition Clause, while fully protected by the actual-malice standard set forth in New York Times Co. v. SullivanSearch
-
to the executive, the legislature, courts, and administrative agencies. See, e.g., Bill Johnson's Restaurants, Inc. v. NLRBSearch
-
California Motor Transport Co. v. TruckingSearch
-
U. S. 510 (1972). It also includes such activities as peaceful protest demonstrations. See, e.g., NAACP v. ClaiborneSearch
-
thus frequently also be protected by the First Amendment freedoms of speech, press, and assembly. See also Adderle v. FloridaSearch
-
New York Time Co. v. SullivanSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court McDonald v. SmithSearch
-
White v. NichollsSearch
-
In United States v. CruikshankSearch
-
of Harris v. HuntingtonSearch
-
Commonwealth v. ClappSearch
-
Gray v. PentlandSearch
-
In White v. NichollsSearch
-
See Mine Workers v. IllinoisSearch
-
See Nixon v. FitzgeraldSearch
-
Lake v. KingSearch
-
NAACP v. ClaiborneSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial