Court Opinion

ID: 9685034
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 14:21:33.105068+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:25.989926
License: Public Domain

HEFFERNAN, J.
(concurring). Under the facts of this case I agree with the majority’s conclusion that Denny was a private person and, accordingly, is not required to prove malice in order to prevail against the media defendant.
*665I would, however, apply the same standard — that of New York Times and its progeny — in suits against either a media or nonmedia defendant. Accordingly, I join in the reasoning of Justice Abrahamson’s dissent in that respect.
Hence, Denny as a private person need not, in my judgment, prove malice in respect to his defamation suit against Mertz. I therefore agree with the mandate of the majority.