Arthur Stanley Kerns v. Charles McWilliams the Mobile Press Register, Inc., and the United Press International, Inc.

Fifth Circuit

Arthur Stanley Kerns v. Charles McWilliams the Mobile Press Register, Inc., and the United Press International, Inc.

435 F.2d 1306, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 12357

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 15, 1971

Docket29703

StatusPublished

This text of 435 F.2d 1306 (Arthur Stanley Kerns v. Charles McWilliams the Mobile Press Register, Inc., and the United Press International, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arthur Stanley Kerns v. Charles McWilliams the Mobile Press Register, Inc., and the United Press International, Inc., 435 F.2d 1306, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 12357 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Charles McWilliams, The Mobile Press Register, Inc. and the United Press International, Inc., defendants in this libel suit, were granted leave to take an interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(b) from an order of the District Court denying their motions for summary judgment.

After considering the briefs and oral arguments we conclude that the order allowing the interlocutory appeal was improvidently granted. Spurlin v. General Motors Corp., 5 Cir. 1970, 426 F.2d 294.

Accordingly, the order heretofore allowing the interlocutory appeal is vacated and the case is remanded for trial on the issues of actual malice defamation and possible damages in accordance with the standards of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 1964, 376 U.S. 254, 84 S.Ct. *1307 710, 11 L.Ed.2d 686 even, though the appellees are not public officials, since they were engaged in a matter of public interest and concern. Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts, 1967, 388 U.S. 130, 152-155, 87 S..Ct. 1975, 18 L.Ed.2d 1094; Time, Inc. v. Ragano, 5 Cir. 1970, 427 F.2d 219; Bon Air Hotel, Inc. v. Time, Inc., 5 Cir. 1970, 426 F.2d 858; Wasserman v. Time, Inc., 1970, 138 U.S.App.D.C. 7, 424 F.2d 920; Time, Inc. v. McLaney, 5 Cir. 1969, 406 F.2d 565, cert. denied, 395 U.S. 922, 89 S.Ct. 1776, 23 L.Ed.2d 239.

Vacated and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Charles McWilliams, The Mobile Press Register, Inc. and the United Press International, Inc., defendants in this libel suit, were granted leave to take an interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(b) from an order of the District Court denying their motions for summary judgment.

After considering the briefs and oral arguments we conclude that the order allowing the interlocutory appeal was improvidently granted. Spurlin v. General Motors Corp., 5 Cir. 1970, 426 F.2d 294.

Accordingly, the order heretofore allowing the interlocutory appeal is vacated and the case is remanded for trial on the issues of actual malice defamation and possible damages in accordance with the standards of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 1964, 376 U.S. 254, 84 S.Ct. *1307 710, 11 L.Ed.2d 686 even, though the appellees are not public officials, since they were engaged in a matter of public interest and concern. Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts, 1967, 388 U.S. 130, 152-155, 87 S..Ct. 1975, 18 L.Ed.2d 1094; Time, Inc. v. Ragano, 5 Cir. 1970, 427 F.2d 219; Bon Air Hotel, Inc. v. Time, Inc., 5 Cir. 1970, 426 F.2d 858; Wasserman v. Time, Inc., 1970, 138 U.S.App.D.C. 7, 424 F.2d 920; Time, Inc. v. McLaney, 5 Cir. 1969, 406 F.2d 565, cert. denied, 395 U.S. 922, 89 S.Ct. 1776, 23 L.Ed.2d 239.

Vacated and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

435 F.2d 1306, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 12357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arthur-stanley-kerns-v-charles-mcwilliams-the-mobile-press-register-inc-ca5-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack