UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal
Abstract
The author analyzes both the Fourth Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Hustler Magazine v. Falwell. After comparing and contrasting both decisions, the author concludes that the courts should apply the actual malice standard to claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress when a public figure brings an independent cause of action.
Recommended Citation
Hollie Their,
The Supreme Court's Decision in Hustler Magazine v. Falwell: The Demise of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress for Public Figures,
10 UC Law SF Comm. & Ent. L.J. 1163
(1988).
Available at: https://repository.uclawsf.edu/hastings_comm_ent_law_journal/vol10/iss4/12
Included in
Communications Law Commons, Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons