Word: courtly
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1990-1999
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...only due to the goodwill of people who didn't complain that you weren't in court," Zewinski adds...
...celebrated suit brought by the supermarket chain Food Lion against ABC has frequently been misrepresented as a grand constitutional battle, a conflict over whether the First Amendment lets reporters commit fraud. The recent federal appeals court decision throwing out almost all of the damages against ABC represents a narrowly and wisely drawn opinion that protects press freedoms without giving the news media an open license to violate...
...appropriate if the story were false. Instead, the chain blamed its losses on the false job applications the reporters filed and their breach of loyalty to their "employer." A jury originally awarded Food Lion more than $5 million in damages; the excessive figure was reduced by the district court to about $300,000. Yet in a 2-1 decision on Oct. 20, a panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals threw out all but $2 of the damages, affirming the principle that the press cannot be penalized for reporting stories that are true...
Food Lion had sued the reporters individually for trespass and disloyalty to employers, both valid grounds for damages under North and South Carolina laws, and the appeals court upheld the jury's awards of $1 on each of these counts. However, the court also ruled that Food Lion had not claimed any specific damages a result of the fraudulent applications filed by the reporters. Food Lion could identify no problems with the reporters' work; indeed, they both received positive reports from their supervisors, one of whom recommended that the reporter be rehired. Because North and South Carolina laws on fraud...
More importantly, the court did not allow Food Lion to request compensation for the damages ABC caused to its reputation. The truth of the PrimeTime Live story was not contested before the court, regardless of the way in which that truth was exposed. As the district court ruled, it was Food Lion's food handling practices themselves, not the method by which they were recorded and published, which caused the chain's losses in sales and stock price. Some might find this distinction tenuous, but the First Amendment places strict requirements on libel suits that challenge a story's truth...