applying actual malice standard to claim that report implied that the plaintiff was a Communist sympathizer
How later courts described this case
- applying actual malice standard to claim that report implied that the plaintiff was a Communist sympathizer
- “The fact that an implied defamatory charge or insinuation leaves room for innocent interpretations as well does not establish that the defamatory meaning does not appear from the language itself . . . [I]t is reasonable to assume that at least some of the readers will take it in its defamatory sense.”
- “Language may be libelous on its face even though it may be susceptible of an innocent interpretation.... The language use may give rise to conflicting inferences as to the meaning intended, but ... it is reasonable to assume that at least some of the readers will take it in a defamatory sense.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
Distinguished
Distinguished by Narayan v. Compass Grp. USA, Inc., 284 F. Supp. 3d 1076 (2018)
Id. Simply put, MacLeod is distinguishable.
The opinion
SPENCE, J.
I dissent. In view of plaintiff’s concession in the trial court that the People’s World had, as stated in defendant’s article, “printed a list of recommendations which included the name of plaintiff,” I am in agreement with the conclusion reached by Mr. Justice McComb that the judgment should be affirmed.
Respondent’s petition for a rehearing was denied August 31, 1959. Peters, J., did not participate therein. Spence, J., and McComb, J., were of the opinion that the petition should be granted.