Court Opinion

ID: 9590012
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:50:58.954405+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:58.660386
License: Public Domain

Holmes, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur with the majority in the decision affirming the judgment of the trial court for the reason that, in my opinion, the statements published about appellant were substantially true and correct. I also concur with most of what is said in the majority *576opinion. However, I respectfully dissent from that portion of the opinion which finds that Steere was a “public figure for all purposes” by reason of his long career in the private practice of law in Franklin County and his involvement in local community, civic and social activities. In my opinion such activities are not of such nature as to automatically make a participant a “public figure for all purposes.”
Pracer, J., joins in the foregoing concurring and dissenting opinion.