Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

WALB-TV, INC. v. Gibson

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided July 6, 1998No. S98A0066Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCarley, Justice

In my opinion, this case evidences no reversible abuse of that discretion which a trial court is authorized to exercise in determining whether to allow the electronic media in the courtroom during a trial. Therefore, I concur fully in the majority’s affirmance of the denial of WALE-TV’S request for such access to the trial of Karen Eckman, but respectfully dissent to the majority’s reversal of the denial of the request as to the trial of William Lematty.

As the majority correctly notes, there is a significant difference between a complete exclusion of the media from a courtroom, and a mere…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. R. W. Page Corp. v. LumpkinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1982
  2. Multimedia WMAZ, Inc. v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1987
  3. GEORGIA TELEVISION COMPANY v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API