United States Supreme Court
390 U.S. 727 (1968)
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
Holding and Reasoning (White, J.)
Concurrence (Black, J.)
Dissent (Fortas, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 219,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.