357 Pa. Super. 570 - Sprague v. Walter’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently May 2003 · most notably 441 Pa. Super. 1 - Sprague v. Walter (1995), 375 Pa. Super. 66 - Larsen v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. (1988)
26 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. · Branzburg v. Hayes · Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[O]ur task is to make an independent examination of the evidence adduced to determine if it was constitutionally sufficient to warrant a finding by the jury of actual malice, and in so doing, the evidence, together with all reasonable inferences therefrom, must be considered in the light most favorable to the verdict winner, here the plaintiff. If it is not sufficient, [the defendant] is entitled to judgment n.o.v.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We wish to lay one item to rest here. There were repeated accusations made and substantiated that Walter [author] had a “vendetta” against Sprague [plaintiff], and he was “obsessed” with seeking retribution for the wiretapping conviction he had suffered at the hands of Mr. Sprague. Nonetheless, not one of the witnesses presented by the plaintiff - could state that Walter intended to accomplish his deed by fabrication/falsehood. Thus, regardless of Walter’s motive, such evidence would not transform itself into “actual malice.” As the Supreme Court of the United States has observed: [U]nder a rule ... permitting a finding of malice based on an intent merely to inflict harm, rather than an intent to inflict harm through falsehood, ‘it becomes a hazardous matter to speak out against a popular politician, with the result that the dishonest and incompetent will be shielded.’ Noel, Defamation of Public Officers and Candidates, 49 Col.L.Rev. 875, 898 (1949). Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64, 73-74 , 85 S.Ct. 209, 215 , 13 L.Ed.2d 125 (1964). See Henry v. Collins, 380 U.S. 356 , 85 S.Ct. 992 , 13 L.Ed.2d 892 (1965).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[R]eckless conduct is not measured by whether a reasonably prudent man would have published, or would have investigated before publishing. There must be sufficient evidence to permit the conclusion that the defendant in fact entertained serious doubts as to the truth of his publication. Publishing with such doubts shows reckless disregard for truth or falsity and demonstrates actual malice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.