Legal Opinion
Biro v. Condé Nast
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided December 8, 2015No. Docket No. 14-3815-cvPublishedCited by 239 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LOHIER, Circuit Judge:
In this appeal from a dismissal of a defamation suit, we address whether Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a limited-purpose public figure to plead in a plausible way that defendants acted with actual malice. We conclude that. it does. We therefore affirm the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Oetken, J.) dismissing plaintiff Peter Paul Biro’s complaint on the ground that he failed to plead sufficient facts to give rise to a plausible inference of actual malice. We dispose of Biro’s remaining…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- ATSI Communications, Inc. v. Shaar Fund, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by239 opinions
- Whiteside v. Hover-Davis-Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2021
- Tannerite Sports, LLC v. NBCUniversal News GroupCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2017
- Prakazrel Michel v. NYP Holdings, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2016
- Kinsey v. New York Times Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2021
- Anas Osama Ibrahim Abdin v. CBS Broadcasting Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2020
234 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.