Legal Opinion
Weinberger v. Maplewood Review
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 18, 2002No. C7-01-2021PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
STONEBURNER, Judge.
Appellant Wally Wakefield, a reporter, appeals from the district court’s order compelling him to disclose, pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 595.025 (defamation exception to the Free Flow of Information Act), which defendant, if any, is the source of statements in a news article. Because respondent Richard Weinberger has failed to establish that the exception applies, we reverse.
FACTS
The Maplewood Review employed Wally Wakefield as a reporter. Wakefield gathered information for an article authored by co-reporter Jason Tarasek concerning the school district’s decision not to…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Branzburg v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Alfonso J. Cervantes v. Time, Inc., and Denny WalshCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1972
- Zerilli v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1981
- Mitchell v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
- Shetka v. Kueppers, Kueppers, Von Feldt & SalmenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Weinberger v. Maplewood ReviewSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
- Range Development Company of Chisholm v. Star Tribune, Paul McEnroeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016
- Weinberger v. Maplewood ReviewSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003