Legality of Cannabis by U.S. Jurisdiction

How this document has been cited

—holding grand jurors subject to New York Times as "public officials," "public figures," or matters of "public interest
—holding that the grand jury “has investigatory powers, including the power to investigate on its own initiative situations where it has reason to believe a public offense has been committed
—the Minnesota Supreme Court held that defendant's newspaper editorial criticizing the official activities, or lack thereof, of a grand jury on which plaintiffs had served constituted a matter of "public or general concern" so that, to sustain a libel action against defendant, plaintiff was required to prove "actual malice" (see definition below, § ID 1).
- in LDRC 50-state Survey, 1982: Current Developments in Media Libel and Invasion … and one similar citation
See id.(observing grand jury members were public officials because grand juries have ability to implicate others for crimes
In balancing the necessity for an uninhibited, free press against the legitimate state interest 5 in allowing the possibility of a less rigorous standard not supported the application of the New York Times standard to all plaintiffs in defamation actions against media defendants when the published matter was "of public concern," many states and several circuits adopted the …
- in In the End, Truth Will Out-Or Will It and one similar citation
However, there is no doubt that Butts is still good law on the proposition for which it is most often cited, namely, that the constitutional protection recognized against suits brought by public officials in New York Times extends as well to cases brought by public figures
—affirming summary judgment for defendant when reporter relied on grand jury records with respect to story concerning investigation
- in Proof of Fault in Media Defamation Litigation and one similar citation
—insufficient evidence of reckless disregard where defendant incorrectly assumed after some research that grand jury was legally required to issue report
Lower court cases citing Rosenblatt often state that the Court held that the plaintiff was a public official.
- in Virginia Law Review and one similar citation
—and government employees having, or appearing to the public to have, substantial responsibility for or control over the conduct of government affairs

Cited by

470 NW 2d 518 - Minn: Supreme Court 1991
244 NW 2d 253 - Minn: Supreme Court 1976
Minn: Court of Appeals 2008
827 F. Supp. 1439 - Dist. Court, Minnesota 1993
294 NW 2d 269 - Minn: Supreme Court 1980
530 SW 2d 611 - Tex: Court of Civil Appeals, 4th Dist. 1975