§
M.V.M., Inc.

16 Cited authorities

  1. Milkovich v. Lorain Journal

    497 U.S. 1 (1990)   Cited 1,776 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statement that implies a false assertion of fact may be actionable even if it is couched as a statement of opinion

  2. Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union

    466 U.S. 485 (1984)   Cited 1,634 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the clear-error standard "does not inhibit an appellate court's power to correct errors of law, including ... a finding of fact that is predicated on a misunderstanding of the governing rule of law"

  3. St. Amant v. Thompson

    390 U.S. 727 (1968)   Cited 1,812 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to show actual malice, plaintiff must show "high degree of awareness of probably falsity"

  4. Garrison v. Louisiana

    379 U.S. 64 (1964)   Cited 1,481 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an individual who recklessly disregards whether an utterance is false can be criminally charged for libel

  5. Softel, Inc. v. Dragon Med. Scientific Comm

    523 U.S. 1020 (1998)   Cited 122 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding prejudicial the potential inclusion of evidence that would have "redrawn the boundaries of the case"

  6. Eastex, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    437 U.S. 556 (1978)   Cited 196 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a newsletter that "urg[ed] employees to write their legislators to oppose incorporation of the state 'right-to-work' statute into a revised state constitution," "criticiz[ed] a Presidential veto of an increase in the federal minimum wage and urg[ed] employees to register to vote" was protected concerted activity

  7. Labor Board v. Burnup Sims

    379 U.S. 21 (1964)   Cited 106 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"

  8. Labor Board v. Electrical Workers

    346 U.S. 464 (1953)   Cited 125 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Upholding discharge where employees publicly disparaged quality of employer's product, with no discernible relationship to pending labor dispute

  9. Jolliff v. N.L.R.B

    513 F.3d 600 (6th Cir. 2008)   Cited 24 times
    In Jolliff, we canvassed the tests and approaches of other circuits and created a framework for ascertaining whether a defamatory meaning can be gleaned from the allegedly defamatory statement.

  10. Tradesmen Intern., Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    275 F.3d 1137 (D.C. Cir. 2002)   Cited 21 times
    Assuming union organizer's activity constituted "concerted activity" under 29 U.S.C. § 157 but holding it was not protected under statute