•  
  •  
 

Authors

Benita A. Lloyd

Abstract

This Note will illustrate how Dun & Bradstreet immensely elevates the distinction between public and private concerns when evaluating what speech deserves first amendment protection in defamation cases. The main thrust is on the deficiencies of the Dun & Bradstreet opinion, and how the Court, although given this opportunity to clarify this area of the law, created greater confusion instead.

Share

COinS
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.