Milligan v. Sinclair Television of Nashville, Inc.

In October 2006, law enforcement conducted a nationwide fugitive round-up. In Nashville, the United States Marshals Service partnered with the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (Metro) to apprehend individuals wanted on felony warrants. Metro clerks reviewed outstanding warrants and entered individuals’ names and identifying information into a spreadsheet. One warrant was for “Paula Milligan a.k.a. Paula Rebecca Straps,” a North Carolina resident in her twenties. Instead of entering this information manually, a clerk used Metro’s database and mistakenly auto-filled the identifying information of a different Paula Milligan (plaintiff), a 42-year-old Tennessee resident. On October 24, officers arrested Milligan at her home. Beforehand, an officer called a warrant clerk to confirm the warrant was still active. The clerk confirmed but did not physically review the warrant, which would have revealed mismatched birth dates. All charges against Milligan were dropped a week later, and the case was dismissed on November 6. WZTV-Fox 17 (Fox), a Nashville television station operated by Sinclair Broadcasting (Sinclair) (defendants), was invited to ride along and report on the operation. On November 2, Fox aired a segment reporting that officers arrived “with warrants in hand” and that “[t]heir first arrest came early—Paula Milligan, wanted on four counts of forgery and one count of identity theft.” The broadcast also showed about seven seconds of video of Milligan being led to a police car. Milligan sued Sinclair for defamation. Sinclair moved for summary judgment, asserting that its broadcast was protected by Tennessee’s fair-report privilege. Milligan responded that Fox’s report was neither a report of an official action nor a fair and accurate portrayal, because it implied officers had a warrant physically present. The district court granted Sinclair’s motion. Milligan appealed.