Opinion ID: 1997708
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Is Ayala a public figure?

Text: Whether a plaintiff is a public official or public figure is a question of law for the court to determine. Moss v. Stockard, 580 A.2d 1011, 1029 (D.C.1990). Our independent examination of the record in light of Supreme Court precedent satisfies us that Ayala is not a public figure. In Gertz, supra, the Court stated that [a]bsent clear evidence of general fame or notoriety in the community, and pervasive involvement in the affairs of society, an individual should not be deemed a public personality for all aspects of his life. 418 U.S. at 352, 92 S.Ct. at 3013. The focus is on the nature and extent of an individual's participation in the particular controversy giving rise to the defamation. Id. In Gertz, the plaintiff was a private lawyer who played a peripheral role in a controversy concerning the criminal prosecution of a police officer. Id. The Court ruled that because Gertz did not thrust himself into the vortex of th[e] public issue, nor did he engage the public's attention in an attempt to influence its outcome Gertz could not be deemed a public figure. Id. Ayala has not thrust himself into the vortex of any controversy concerning drug use by pilots, nor has he in any sense engaged the attention of the public. The Court's holding in Hutchinson v. Proxmire, 443 U.S. 111, 99 S.Ct. 2675, 61 L.Ed.2d 411 (1979), confirms that Ayala is not a public figure. In Hutchinson, the plaintiff was a scientist who received federal grants to conduct research to measure stress in animals by the tension in their jaws. Senator Proximate awarded a Golden Fleece award mocking Hutchinson's work. Suing for defamation, Hutchinson contended that Proxmire's newsletter and television statements regarding the award mischaracterized his research. The Court held that Hutchinson was not a public figure, id. at 135-36, 99 S.Ct. 2688-89, stating, Clearly, those charged with defamation cannot, by their own conduct, creature their own defense by making the claimant a public figure. Id. at 135, 99 S.Ct. at 2688. Nor was a general concern about public expenditures enough to make Hutchinson a public figure. Id. Because Hutchinson no time thrust himself into view or assumed any role of public prominence, he was not a public figure. Id. By virtue of his position, like Hutchinson, Ayala potentially affected a matter of public concern; but also like Hutchinson Ayala did nothing to assume a public role regarding that concern. Consequently, Ayala cannot be considered a public figure. [5] To the extent that the trial court's grant of judgment as a matter of law vacated the jury's award of compensatory damages, it must be reversed, and the jury's award of $1.00 in compensatory damages, reinstated.