Legal Opinion
Koch v. Laborico
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided December 7, 1983No. A8001-00280; CA A26735PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoomissen, J.
This is a defamation action. Plaintiff appeals from summary judgment for defendants. He contends that the trial court erred in finding (1) that he was a “public official” under the rule in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 US 254, 84 S Ct 710, 11 L Ed 2d 686 (1964), (2) that there was no basis on which the issue of actual malice could be submitted to a jury and (3) that defendant Laborico’s allegedly libelous communication was conditionally privileged.
We agree with the trial court that plaintiff was a “public official” under the New York Times rule. We conclude, however, that the court…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- St. Amant v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Herbert v. LandoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Rosenblatt v. BaerSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- McNabb v. Oregonian Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
- Cooper v. Portland General Electric Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
- Wallulis v. DymowskiCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
- Victoria v. Le BLANCCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000