×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Published Opinions Are Protected Rhetorical Hyperbole And Thus Non-Actionable
Workers World Party, Inc. (the Party), subsidiary WW Publishers, Inc., and
reporter Brenda Ryan motioned the court to dismiss actions brought by The
Renco Group, Inc. (Renco), for newspaper and internet publishing alleging
that Renco "robbed" workers' pension funds, The court held that the claims
were non-actionable opinion and granted the dismissal of the complaint.
The Party owns and operates the companies that publish the articles and
refused to retract the allegations or apologize. The articles state that
there is a "widespread campaign of corporations like Delta Airlines, IBM,
and Alcoa taking steps to deprive workers of pensions" and "now the brutal
hand of capitalism wants to snatch away this hard earned pay." The
plaintiff argued that the use of the word "robbing" was the basis for the
complaint. The defendants claimed that the article accurately described
Renco as robbing the pension funds and was protected opinion and rhetorical
hyperbole and were non-actionable.
The New York County Supreme Court, in viewing the publishers as a whole,
held that the statements alleged to be libelous were in fact non-actionable
opinion and granted the dismissal. See: The Renco Group, Inc. v. Workers
World Party. Inc., Slip Op 51809(U) (N.Y. 2006).
reporter Brenda Ryan motioned the court to dismiss actions brought by The
Renco Group, Inc. (Renco), for newspaper and internet publishing alleging
that Renco "robbed" workers' pension funds, The court held that the claims
were non-actionable opinion and granted the dismissal of the complaint.
The Party owns and operates the companies that publish the articles and
refused to retract the allegations or apologize. The articles state that
there is a "widespread campaign of corporations like Delta Airlines, IBM,
and Alcoa taking steps to deprive workers of pensions" and "now the brutal
hand of capitalism wants to snatch away this hard earned pay." The
plaintiff argued that the use of the word "robbing" was the basis for the
complaint. The defendants claimed that the article accurately described
Renco as robbing the pension funds and was protected opinion and rhetorical
hyperbole and were non-actionable.
The New York County Supreme Court, in viewing the publishers as a whole,
held that the statements alleged to be libelous were in fact non-actionable
opinion and granted the dismissal. See: The Renco Group, Inc. v. Workers
World Party. Inc., Slip Op 51809(U) (N.Y. 2006).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
The Renco Group, Inc. v. Workers World Party. Inc.
| Year | 2006 |
|---|---|
| Cite | Slip Op 51809(U) (N.Y. 2006) |
| Level | State Trial Court |
| Attorney Fees | 0 |
| Damages | 0 |
| Injunction Status | N/A |