Legal Opinion

KAREN THOMPSON v. WILLIAM H. ARMSTRONG.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided April 7, 2016No. 14-CV-792PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FARRELL, Senior Judge:

A jury awarded William H. Armstrong sizable damages in his suit alleging intentional -interference with a prospective contractual relationship by Karen Thompson. Before us is Ms. Thompson’s appeal contending, mainly, that she was erroneously denied judgment as a matter of law because the suit, premised on true or non-provably false statements she had -made to a government agency about Mr. Armstrong’s fitness for a law enforcement position, was precluded by the First Amendment, In light of what we conclude was Mr. Armstrong’s status as a public official at the time, we…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Connick Ex Rel. Parish of Orleans v. MyersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. St. Amant v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  4. Garrison v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  5. Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Banks v. HoffmanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2023
  2. Khan v. Orbis Business LimitedDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API