TAILIEUCHUNG - Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 12 P42

Gale Encyclopedia of American Law Volume 12 P42 fully illuminates today's leading cases, major statutes, legal terms and concepts, notable persons involved with the law, important documents and more. Legal issues are fully discussed in easy-to-understand language, including such high-profile topics as the Americans with Disabilities Act, capital punishment, domestic violence, gay and lesbian rights, physician-assisted suicide and thousands more. | MILESTONES IN THE LAW NEW YORK TIMES V. SULLIVAN 397 apparently requires proof of actual malice for an award of punitive damages 24 where general damages are concerned malice is presumed. Such a presumption is inconsistent with the federal rule. The power to create presumptions is not a means of escape from constitutional restrictions Bailey v. Alabama 219 . 219 239 31 . 145 151 55 . 191 t he showing of malice required for the forfeiture of the privilege is not presumed but is a matter for proof by the plaintiff Lawrence v. Fox 357 Mich. 134 146 97 719 725 1959 .25 Since the trial judge did not instruct the jury to differentiate between general and punitive damages it may be that the verdict was wholly an award of one or the other. But it is impossible to know in view of the general verdict returned. Because of this uncertainty the judgment must be reversed and the case remanded. Stromberg v. California 283 . 359 367-368 51 . 532 535 75 . 1117 Williams v. North Carolina 317 . 287 291292 63 . 207 209-210 87 . 279 see Yates v. United States 354 . 298 311-312 77 . 1064 1073 1 . 2d 1356 Cramer v. United States 325 . 1 36 n. 45 65 . 918 935 940 89 . 1441. 24-26 Since respondent may seek a new trial we deem that considerations of effective judicial administration require us to review the evidence in the present record to determine 24Johnson Publishing Co. v Davis 271 Ala. 474 487 124 441 450 1960 . Thus the trial judge here instructed the jury that mere negligence or carelessness is not evidence of actual malice or malice in fact and does not justify an award of exemplary or punitive damages in an action for libel. The court refused however to give the following instruction which had been requested by the Times I charge you that punitive damages as the name indicates are designed to punish the defendant the New York Times Company a corporation and the other defendants in this case and I further charge .

TAILIEUCHUNG - Chia sẻ tài liệu không giới hạn
Địa chỉ : 444 Hoang Hoa Tham, Hanoi, Viet Nam
Website : tailieuchung.com
Email : tailieuchung20@gmail.com
Tailieuchung.com là thư viện tài liệu trực tuyến, nơi chia sẽ trao đổi hàng triệu tài liệu như luận văn đồ án, sách, giáo trình, đề thi.
Chúng tôi không chịu trách nhiệm liên quan đến các vấn đề bản quyền nội dung tài liệu được thành viên tự nguyện đăng tải lên, nếu phát hiện thấy tài liệu xấu hoặc tài liệu có bản quyền xin hãy email cho chúng tôi.
Đã phát hiện trình chặn quảng cáo AdBlock
Trang web này phụ thuộc vào doanh thu từ số lần hiển thị quảng cáo để tồn tại. Vui lòng tắt trình chặn quảng cáo của bạn hoặc tạm dừng tính năng chặn quảng cáo cho trang web này.