| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Carol Burnett v. National Enquirer, Inc. ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Burnett v. National Enquirer, Inc.
''Carol Burnett v. National Enquirer, Inc.'', was a decision by the California Court of Appeals which ruled that "actual malice" required under California law for imposition of punitive damages is distinct from the "actual malice" required by ''New York Times v. Sullivan'' in order to be liable for defaming a "public figure", and that the ''National Enquirer'' is not a "newspaper" for the purposes of California libel law.
==Facts==
Carol Burnett is an actress. In January 1976 she was dining at the ''Rive Gauche'' restaurant in Georgetown, Washington, D.C. She drank "two or three" glasses of wine, but was not drunk. She exchanged parts of her dessert, a chocolate soufflé, with diners at a couple of neighboring tables after they became curious about it. Later, as she was leaving the restaurant, she was introduced to Henry Kissinger, who was also dining in the restaurant.
In March of that year the ''National Enquirer'' published a short item about the incident entitled "Carol Burnett and Henry K. in Row". It read, in its entirety:
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Burnett v. National Enquirer, Inc.」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|