Konigsberg v. Time, Inc.

S.D. New York

Konigsberg v. Time, Inc.

288 F. Supp. 989, 1968 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9462

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York

DecidedAugust 7, 1968

Docket68 Civ. 3142

StatusPublished

Cited by18 cases

This text of 288 F. Supp. 989 (Konigsberg v. Time, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Konigsberg v. Time, Inc., 288 F. Supp. 989, 1968 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9462 (S.D.N.Y. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

POLLACK, District Judge.

Plaintiff seeks to enjoin defendant from publishing magazine articles which allegedly libel the plaintiff and the August 9, 1968 issue of Life Magazine in particular which contains an article entitled “The Mob: The Congressman and the Hoodlum” and which contains statements regarding the plaintiff which, if false, would constitute libel.

A court of equity will not, except in special circumstances, issue an injunctive order restraining libel or slander or otherwise restricting free speech.

To enjoin any publication, no matter how libelous, would be repugnant to the First Amendment to the Constitution, Crosby v. Bradstreet Co., 312 F.2d 483 (2d Cir. 1963); Parker v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., 320 F.2d 937 (2d Cir. 1963); cf. Near v. State of Minnesota ex rel. Olson, 283 U.S. 697, 51 S.Ct. 625, 75 L.Ed. 1357 (1931), and to historic principles of equity. American Malting Co. v. Keitel, 209 F. 351 (C.C.A. 2, 1913).

The motion for an injunction is therefore denied.

So. ordered.

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