Question

case brief about the Greenbalt cooperative publishing association v. bresler

Answer 1

This particular case is a United Nation Supreme Court case from 1970 in which the court held that using the word "blackmail" in a newspaper article "was no more than rhetorical hyperbole" and that finding such usage as libel and it would subvert the most fundamental meaning of a free press guranteed by First Amendment to United States constitution. The ruling also touched plaintiff's status as a public figure.

Background of the case

Dorothy Sucher, a reporter for the Greenbelt News Review of Greenbelt, Maryland, covered a city council hearing in a case where a developer in Greenbelt, Maryland was trying to obtain variences to develop high-density housing on land he owned but at the same time the city wanted to purchase a parcel of land for school building. Bresler indicated that he would be intending to sell his property to city as long as he is receiving variences. But the residents at the hearing were critical of the deal and the way that Bresler was using to delay sale of land for school building and obtain rights to build housing colonies. Sucher in an article on October14, 1965 covering the city council hearing quoted a resident saying that "It seems that this is a slight case of blackmail" and also stated same word being echoed in the court room by many speakers.

A charge that was rejected in the article by many council member who said that it was not blackmailing but a part of " two-way street" negotiation process.

Bresler field a lawsuit in Prince George's Country circuit court claiming the allegations and use of word "blackmail" constituted libel, and jury found in his favour, awarding him $5,000 in compensatory damages and $ 12,500 in punitive damages.

The judgement was affirmed by Maryland Court of Appeals, and certiorari was granted by the US Supreme Court.

Supreme Court's opinion

US. Supreme Court in 1970 ruled 8-0 to overturn lower court ruling. The majority found that Bresler was a public figure as defined by New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) and has served as a member of Maryland House of Delegates and the claim was false or in reckless disregard for truth.

Supreme Court found Lower court's judgement incorrect in setting a standard for making verdict. The opinion written by Associated Justice Potter Stewart held that " even the most careless readder must have perceived that the word was no more than rhetorical hyperbole" and that no reader would have interpreted the word as Bresler commitindg a criminal offence. To have ruled otherwise " would subvert the most fundamental meaning of a freee press."