Reporting privilege threatened

Indiana appears to be an island of sanity sometimes when I read about events in other states.

For example, the New Jersey Supreme Court will rule on a case that could eliminate news coverage of the courts in that state. The question is whether the “fair reporting privilege” newspapers have relied upon to report accusations made in a court record will continue.

The Bergen Record was sued over a 2006 story based on a federal bankruptcy court complaint alleging that Thomas Salzano misappropriated $500,000 from a now-defunct Newark telecommunications company for personal use. The accusation was made in filed court records by the bankruptcy trustee, according to the Bergen Record.

Salzano filed a libel lawsuit against the newspaper’s parent company, New Jersey Media Group. He says the accusations are unfounded.

The original court dismissed Salzano’s lawsuit, but it was reinstated by an appeals court.

The Cliffview Pilot in New Jersey reports that the appellate decision said the newspaper wasn’t privileged to “republish alleged defamatory statements within a bankruptcy court complaint” because the newspaper did not independently verify the truth of the allegations.

The appeals panel essentially ruled that a newspaper must verify the alleged facts of a complaint before publishing a story on a case. The judges’ concern was that anyone could file a bogus complaint intended to harm the defendant through the mere publication of a story on the lawsuit and then withdraw the complaint after the defendant’s reputation has been trashed.

The appellate decision said the “fair reporting privilege” should apply to court decisions, not to initial case filing documents.

NJMG has appealed to the state’s Supreme Court and been joined by an amicus brief from the New Jersey Press Association and 18 other press and civil liberties organizations.

If one agreed with the appellate decision, then the same argument could be applied to criminal cases. Newspapers would risk libel lawsuits in reporting on criminal charges filed by a prosecutor or arrests made by the police unless they independently verified that the defendant committed the alleged crime.

The same would hold true for defamatory accusations made during the heat of a city council or school board meeting attended by a reporter. Without independently verifying the allegations, lawsuits would fly.

Newspapers would be confined to reporting on civil case decisions, criminal case verdicts and final votes of governing bodies.

The case resembles the libel case against the Tribune-Star (Terre Haute) filed by Clay County Sheriff’s Deputy Jeff Maynard. Although the newspaper merely reported on the allegations filed with the law enforcement agency by a woman, a Sullivan County jury ruled in the deputy’s favor with a $1.5 million verdict against the newspaper.

Of course it wasn’t my money at risk, but from my safe perspective, it was unfortunate that the Tribune-Star decided to settle the lawsuit rather than continue its fight at the appellate level.

I do have a greater appreciation though for a rule instituted at the Daily Journal (Franklin) while I was a reporter by then editor “Bud” Herron concerning stories about civil cases.

All civil case stories in the Daily Journal had to include a paragraph reciting that allegations made in a civil case were not necessarily true and the veracity of the complaint would be determined by the jury or judge if there was no jury involved.

That advice seems even more sound in light of the New Jersey case.
————
Steve Key is the attorney for Hoosier State Press Association.