Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

trialsummary judgmentcorporationhazardous waste

plaintiffdefendanttrialmotionsummary judgmentcorporationappellantmotion for summary judgment

Related Cases

White v. Mobile Press Register, Inc., 514 So.2d 902, 14 Media L. Rep. 1606

Facts

John White, after retiring from the EPA, became an officer in three corporations involved in hazardous waste transportation. Following the publication of an article by the Press Register about a purportedly lost shipment of cyanide sludge, White claimed the article was libelous. The article included a quote from White and was based on information from the Alabama Department of Environmental Management. A subsequent article clarified that the shipment had been located and that a waste stream had been rejected, not the shipment itself.

White is a former regional administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (hereinafter “E.P.A.”). Soon after his retirement from E.P.A., White became an officer in Environmental Pollution Control, Inc., Environmental Planning and Development Corporation, and Environmental Development Systems, Inc.

Issue

Did the Press Register publish the allegedly libelous material about John White with actual malice, given that he was a limited-purpose public figure?

Rule

A public figure must show that a publication was made with actual malice, which requires clear and convincing evidence that the publisher acted with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth.

Once it is determined that a plaintiff is a public figure, then any publication that allegedly had libeled the plaintiff must be shown to have been produced with actual malice.

Analysis

The court determined that White was a limited-purpose public figure due to his prior role with the EPA and his involvement in a controversial industry. The court found that the Press Register's articles were based on information from a credible source and that White did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the newspaper acted with actual malice in its reporting.

The court determines as a matter of law whether an individual is a public figure.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of the Press Register, concluding that White failed to prove actual malice in the publication of the articles.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Who won?

Mobile Press Register, Inc. prevailed in the case because the court found that White, as a limited-purpose public figure, did not provide clear and convincing evidence of actual malice in the newspaper's reporting.

The trial court found appellant, John White, to be a limited-purpose public figure and held that he had failed to defeat the defendant's motion for summary judgment by establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, that the allegedly libelous material was published by the Press Register with actual malice.

You must be

Log In to Casey

Sign Up to Casey

Reset Your Password

Keywords

Related Cases

Dillard v. Pittway Corp., 719 So.2d 188

Zirkle v. Winkler, 214 W.Va. 19, 585 S.E.2d 19

Lambertson v. Cincinnati Welding Corp., 312 Minn. 114, 257 N.W.2d 679, 100 A.L.R.3d 335

Burrell v. Meads, 569 N.E.2d 637, 59 USLW 2642

Jordan v. Deery, 609 N.E.2d 1104