Legal Opinion
Francis v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 7, 1992No. G010067PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SILLS, P. J.
In this case we hold that plaintiffs may not maintain causes of action for defamation and related torts against a credit reporting company which publishes a report which plaintiffs concede is true. This is hardly a groundbreaking result; truth has been used as a defense to a defamation action in this country ever since John Peter Zenger’s trial in 1735. Plaintiffs seek to avoid the truth, so to speak, by claiming that the factual credit report implies they are not creditworthy. We reject this contention; truth is an absolute defense.
Facts
The facts, literally, are not in…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Reader's Digest Assn. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
- Polygram Records, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- Hejmadi v. Amfac, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1988
- Cohen v. Equitable Life Assurance SocietyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Gorman v. Wolpoff & Abramson, LLPCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Tiernan v. Charleston Area Medical Center, Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1998
- Ringler Associates Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 2000
- Smith v. MaldonadoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Wimsatt v. Beverly Hills Weight Loss Clinics International, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1995
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.