Difference between revisions of "Paul v. Davis"
From Conservapedia
(oops, I meant Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages - don't sue us!!!) |
(moved cat) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
In another case, a demoted employee was awarded a quarter of million dollars after Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages pressured customers to sign false statements that hurt the employee's reputation. <ref> [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3898/is_200410/ai_n9452366 (FindLaw)] </ref> | In another case, a demoted employee was awarded a quarter of million dollars after Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages pressured customers to sign false statements that hurt the employee's reputation. <ref> [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3898/is_200410/ai_n9452366 (FindLaw)] </ref> | ||
| − | [[category: | + | [[category:United States Supreme Court Cases]] |
Revision as of 19:30, August 25, 2007
In Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693, 701-02 (1976), then-Justice William Rehnquist wrote for a divided U.S. Supreme Court that "[d]amage to reputation alone is not actionable under § 1983 unless accompanied by injury to "some more tangible interests."
This holding has frequently been distinguished and questioned by lower courts.
In another case, a demoted employee was awarded a quarter of million dollars after Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages pressured customers to sign false statements that hurt the employee's reputation. [1]