Word: libeler
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...Confidential magazine and two of its imitators, legal troubles were piling up last week. In Los Angeles Superior Court, Tobacco Heiress Doris Duke slapped a $3,000,000 libel suit on Confidential and Publisher Robert Harrison for a scurrilous article about her and a Negro handyman and chauffeur whom the magazine said she once employed. Confidential's implication of "indecent acts" is "completely and entirely false and untrue," said her suit (the fifth libel action now pending against Confidential), and exposed her to "disgrace, contempt and ridicule.'' Hollywood Attorney Jerry Giesler, who filed the suit, said...
There is an even bigger reason why Confidential has had so few libel suits. Most people damaged by Confidential do not want to draw attention to the article and the magazine by suing, thus spreading the storm. They would rather try to ignore it than be entangled in the dirty fight that a libel suit would bring...
...illusion of reporting the "lowdown" on celebrities. Its standard method: dig up one sensational "fact" and embroider it for 1,500 to 2,000 words. If the subject thinks of suing, he may quickly realize that the fact is true, even if the embroidery is not. Confidential has four libel suits pending against it (including two started by Cinemactors Errol Flynn and Robert Mitchum). But few of its subjects are inclined to go to court over what the magazine prints. Said one Hollywood star: "You've got to have guts or your skirts have to be awfully clean before...
...pretty good working democracy from 1910 to 1946-become "politically civilized." Then he announced that the Constituent Assembly, Colombia's make-do Congress, would not sit this year. "A Parliament," he explained, "is the greatest achievement of democracy, but when it becomes a tribune for libel, it must be closed." The last and plainest word came from the government's radio bulletin, which all Colombian stations are forced to carry. After an exhaustive defense of military government, the program concluded that there are "three incontrovertible arguments" for the army state: "Patriotism, intelligence, and machine guns...
...view the humor in the same light . . . These explanations are wholly without merit or substance." The court unanimously upheld the $175,001 judgment against Pegler and his Hearst employers, who must pay the bill under terms of Pegler's contract. It is one of the biggest libel awards ever given by a U.S. court...