Kahl v. Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.

In 1983, Yorie Von Kahl (plaintiff) was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the controversial murder of two federal marshals. For years, Kahl kept the controversy alive by giving frequent press interviews and repeatedly challenging courts to overturn his convictions. Kahl’s latest challenge was a 2005 mandamus petition in which Kahl included his own excerpt of the 1983 sentencing-hearing transcript. Portions of the excerpt quoted, without attribution, transcribed remarks that defamed Kahl’s motives and lack of remorse. A news-service summary prepared by the Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (BNA) (defendant) included the unattributed defamatory remarks. Kahl’s lawyer demanded that BNA identify the source of the defamation. As any reasonable reader might assume from reading Kahl’s ineptly edited excerpt, BNA assumed that the defamatory remarks had been made by the sentencing judge. BNA stated as much in the apology it published in response to the lawyer’s demand. Kahl’s lawyer complained to BNA again. For the first time, the lawyer corrected BNA’s incorrect assumption and tagged the trial prosecutor as the defamation’s source. When BNA refused the lawyer’s demand for a second apology, Kahl sued for defamation. The federal district court denied BNA’s motion for summary judgment. BNA appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.