In
Price
v. Stossel, (9th Cir., Aug. 24, 2010), the U.S. 9th Circuit
Court of Appeals reversed a California district court's early-stage
dismissal under California's
anti-SLAPP
statute of a defamation claim by a prosperity gospel evangelist.
Dr.
Frederick Price brought an action against ABC television
correspondent John Stossel and others involved in producing the show
20/20. On the show, Stossel showed a clip of a sermon by Price in which
Price describes a person with substanital wealth. Out of context the
show suggested Price was talking about himself when, in fact, the quote
was about a hypothetical wealthy person who was spiritally unfulfilled.
The 9th Circuit held that for purposes of an anti-SLAPP motion, the
court should determine whether the clip as broadcast materially altered
the meaning conveyed by the speaker. The district court had erroneously
relied on the conclusion that the statement's meaning, while distorted
by ABC, was still substantially true. In remanding to the district
court, the 9th Circuit said it was expressing no opinion on whether
plaintiff could show the other required elements of a defamation claim.
OC
Weekly yesterday reported on the opinion.
By
- Howard M. Friedman
No comments:
Post a Comment