CBS, Inc. v. Davis
United States Supreme Court
510 U.S. 1315 (1994)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
CBS, Inc., and related media organizations (collectively, CBS) (defendants) were conducting an ongoing investigation into the sanitation practices at meatpacking plants. In cooperation with CBS, an employee of Federal Beef Processors, Inc. (Federal) (plaintiff) voluntarily agreed to wear concealed camera equipment during his shift one day inside Federal’s plant. Subsequently, CBS obtained the video footage of Federal’s meatpacking operations, which CBS intended to broadcast without revealing Federal as the source of the material, but rather, to show industry practices. Federal sued CBS to stop the broadcast, alleging claims of trespass and violation of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. A South Dakota circuit court entered a temporary restraining order, precluding the broadcast of any footage of the interior of Federal’s plant. The court found that disclosure could result in a refusal to purchase Federal’s beef, causing significant economic harm to Federal, and dissemination of Federal’s confidential processes. Although the court found no evidence of criminal activity, the court indicated that the videotape was obtained through CBS’s “calculated misdeeds.” The state’s appellate court denied CBS’s request for a stay of the injunction. CBS sought writ relief from the United States Supreme Court based on a claimed violation of the First Amendment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.