Gales v. CBS Broadcasting, Inc.

124 F. App'x 275
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMarch 3, 2005
Docket04-60710
StatusUnpublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 124 F. App'x 275 (Gales v. CBS Broadcasting, 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
Gales v. CBS Broadcasting, Inc., 124 F. App'x 275 (5th Cir. 2005).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

This case revolves around a segment aired on the weekly news program entitled “60 Minutes” that is broadcast by CBS. The segment in question, shown on the November 20, 2002, edition of 60 Minutes was entitled “Jackpot Justice” and focused on the perceived impropriety of large jury verdicts that were being awarded in the State of Mississippi. Plaintiffs, who are all members of a jury mentioned in the segment, brought claims against CBS and other named defendants for: (1) libel, slander and defamation; (2) invasion of privacy (appropriation of another’s identity for an unpermitted use); (3) invasion of privacy (holding another in the public eye in a false light); (4) gross negligence or intentional infliction of emotional distress; and (5) malicious reckless, wantonness, negligence or gross negligence. They seek declaratory, equitable and/or injunctive relief along with compensatory and punitive damages.

Plaintiffs appeal the district court’s denial of their motion to remand for lack of complete diversity and the district court’s grant of defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. This court reviews the denial of a motion to remand de novo. Heritage Bank v. Redcom Laboratories, Inc., 250 F.3d 319, 323 (5th Cir.2001). Similarly, we review a district court’s ruling on a motion for judgment on the pleadings de novo. Johnson v. Johnson, 385 F.3d 503, 529 (5th Cir.2004).

After a review of the record, we agree with the district court’s characterization that: “at best [the statements in the 60 Minutes broadcast] were directed towards Jefferson County jurors in general. Thus, they lack the specificity required to impose liability. “Vague, general references to a comparatively large group do not constitute actionable defamation.’ ” Dist Ct. Op. at 24 (quoting 52 A.L.R.4th 618, § 23, citing Michigan United Conservation Clubs v. CBS News, Div. of CBS, Inc., 655 F.2d 110 (6th Cir.1981)). We therefore affirm the district court’s order for essentially the reasons as well-stated in its memorandum opinion and order.

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

Related

Greene v. Entergy Operations
Fifth Circuit, 2025
Willie J. Perkins, Sr. v. James K. Littleton
270 So. 3d 208 (Court of Appeals of Mississippi, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
124 F. App'x 275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gales-v-cbs-broadcasting-inc-ca5-2005.