statement is non-actionable unless “the libel as published would have a different effect on the mind of the reader from that which the pleaded truth would have produced” (quoting Memphis Pub. Co. v. Nichols, 569 S.W.2d 412, 420 (Tenn. 1978)
How later courts described this case
- statement is non-actionable unless “the libel as published would have a different effect on the mind of the reader from that which the pleaded truth would have produced” (quoting Memphis Pub. Co. v. Nichols, 569 S.W.2d 412, 420 (Tenn. 1978)
- "For a communication to be libelous, it must constitute a serious threat to the plaintiff's reputation. A libel does not occur simply because the subject of a publication finds the publication annoying, offensive or embarrassing. The words must reasonably be construable as holding the plaintiff up to public hatred, contempt or ridicule. They must carry with them an element 'of disgrace.' "
- defining what statements are libelous
- “In determining whether the published words are reasonably capable of such a meaning, the courts must look to the words themselves and are not bound by the plaintiffs interpretation of them.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
TODD, Presiding Judge,
concurring.
I fully concur in that part of the principal opinion which deals with the non-liability of the Mid-South Publishing Company, Inc., d/b/a The Daily News Journal.
I concur in the result reached in respect to Donald H. Keith d/b/a The Press, but only on the basis that the plaintiff failed to offer satisfactory evidence that the publication was capable of interpretation in a defamatory, i.e., libelous meaning. I cannot agree that a newspaper is entitled to a summary judgment where it prints a non-libelous letter under a libelous headline.