LexisNexis Global


LexisNexis Sites

	Home >Issues Spotlight > Rule of Law Reed Elsevier Defends Rule of Law and Freedom of the Press	* Required fields Recipient’s name:* Recipient’s email:* Your name:* Your email:* Message: Your email has been sent. Close

Sign On| Create an Account

Rule of Law

10/7/2009 12:13:42 PM EST

Reed Elsevier Defends Rule of Law and Freedom of the Press

Posted by Rule of Law Resource Center Staff

Can First Amendment free press protections be circumvented by relabeling a defamation claim as one for intentional infliction of emotional distress? The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is about to weigh in on this issue.

On September 9, 2009, the Court heard arguments in the matter of Howell v. The Enterprise Publishing Company et al. (SJC No. 10359). At issue is whether a newspaper’s accurate reporting of actions taken by a municipal government to terminate an employee can support an emotional distress claim by that employee against the newspaper. A duplicative claim relabeled as defamation was dismissed by the lower appellate court because of fair report privilege.

The newspaper accurately reported that the employee had been terminated for, among other things, possessing pornographic images on a government computer. Although there is a dispute as to whether the images were in fact “pornographic,” it is uncontested that the municipality fired the employee in part for that reason and the newspaper reported the statements and actions by the town’s officials.

Reed Elsevier, Inc. (the parent company of LexisNexis) and the Associated Press are supporting the rule of law and press freedoms by filing an amici curiae brief (PDF file) urging the Court to dismiss the emotional distress claim because of the chilling effect that such unfounded retributive actions would have upon the freedom of the press.