St. Amant v. Thompson
United States Supreme Court
390 U.S. 727, 88 S.Ct. 1323, 20 L.Ed.2d 262 (1968)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
St. Amant (defendant) made a televised speech in which he falsely accused Thompson (plaintiff), a deputy sheriff and thus public official, of criminal conduct. Thompson brought suit for defamation. The trial judge found in favor of Thompson and denied St. Amant’s motion for a new trial based on the holding in New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), which was decided after the trial. The appellate court reversed the judgment, finding that St. Amant had not acted with actual malice as defined in Sullivan. The Louisiana Supreme Court reversed, finding that St. Amant had made the statement recklessly, although not knowingly, and had thus acted with actual malice. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (White, J.)
Concurrence (Black, J.)
Dissent (Fortas, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.
