Cook v. Winfrey
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
975 F.Supp. 1045 (1997)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Randolph Cook (plaintiff), a resident of Ohio, filed suit against Oprah Winfrey (defendant), a resident of Illinois and television talk show host, alleging that Winfrey had slandered him in public and private conversations with other individuals. Cook alleged that he and Winfrey had a relationship in the past during which time he claimed he and Winfrey used cocaine on a regular basis. Cook was in contact with several media outlets to publish articles and stories regarding their alleged relationship. While entertaining offers from the media, Cook claims Winfrey denied the pair ever had a relationship and made statements indicating he was a “liar” and that he could not be trusted or believed. Based upon Winfrey’s comments, Cook then filed suit. After the suit was filed, Winfrey was quoted in the National Enquirer, a national news tabloid, that she would fight the lawsuit until she was bankrupt before she gave a penny to Cook, the liar, and that the suit was a “pack of lies.” Cook claimed that he was prevented from entering into an agreement with any media outlet to sell his story due to Winfrey’s comments. Cook amended his initial complaint to take into account Winfrey’s comments after the suit was filed. Winfrey filed a motion to dismiss Cook’s amended complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kocoras, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 782,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
