24 Cited authorities

Columbia Broadcasting v. Democratic Comm
412 U.S. 94 (1973) Cited 396 times
Holding that First Amendment restrains "government action, not that of private persons"
Immuno Ag. v. Moor-Jankowski
77 N.Y.2d 235 (N.Y. 1991) Cited 375 times
Holding that the New York State Constitution independently provides protection for statements of opinion greater than those required by the First Amendment
United States v. Burke
700 F.2d 70 (2d Cir. 1983) Cited 198 times
Concluding that there is "no legally-principled reason for drawing a distinction between civil and criminal cases when considering whether the reporter's interest in confidentiality should yield to the moving party's need for probative evidence."
O'Neill v. Oakgrove Constr
71 N.Y.2d 521 (N.Y. 1988) Cited 165 times 1 Legal Analyses
Recognizing a qualified privilege arising under the federal and the state constitutions for non-confidential materials
Baker v. F F Investment
470 F.2d 778 (2d Cir. 1972) Cited 170 times 1 Legal Analyses
Upholding reporter's privilege in part because information sought was not important
Gonzales v. National Broadcasting Co., Inc.
186 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 1998) Cited 79 times
Holding that nonconfidential materials are protected under the journalist's privilege because there is a "broader concern for the potential harm to the 'paramount public interest in the maintenance of a vigorous, aggressive and independent press'" (quoting Baker, 470 F.2d at 782)
Holmes v. Winter
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 8194 (N.Y. 2013) Cited 37 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding out-of-State balancing test to provide insufficient protection
Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp.
563 F.2d 433 (10th Cir. 1977) Cited 114 times
Holding that the existence of a qualified reporter's privilege "is no longer in doubt"
Riley v. City of Chester
612 F.2d 708 (3d Cir. 1979) Cited 104 times
Upholding assertion of privilege
Matter of Beach v. Shanley
62 N.Y.2d 241 (N.Y. 1984) Cited 91 times 2 Legal Analyses
In Beach we held that a Grand Jury subpoena should have been quashed where the only testimony sought was the identity of a broadcast reporter's confidential source.
Section 79-H - Special provisions relating to persons employed by, or connected with, news media
N.Y. Civ. Rights Law § 79-H Cited 184 times 5 Legal Analyses
Applying New York's Shield Law only to "professional journalists and newscasters"

In the Matter of the People, Appellant,v.Conrado Juarez, Defendant. Frances Robles, Nonparty Respondent.

24 Cited authorities

Holding that First Amendment restrains "government action, not that of private persons"

Holding that the New York State Constitution independently provides protection for statements of opinion greater than those required by the First Amendment

Concluding that there is "no legally-principled reason for drawing a distinction between civil and criminal cases when considering whether the reporter's interest in confidentiality should yield to the moving party's need for probative evidence."

Recognizing a qualified privilege arising under the federal and the state constitutions for non-confidential materials

Upholding reporter's privilege in part because information sought was not important

Holding that nonconfidential materials are protected under the journalist's privilege because there is a "broader concern for the potential harm to the 'paramount public interest in the maintenance of a vigorous, aggressive and independent press'" (quoting Baker, 470 F.2d at 782)

Finding out-of-State balancing test to provide insufficient protection

Holding that the existence of a qualified reporter's privilege "is no longer in doubt"

Upholding assertion of privilege

In Beach we held that a Grand Jury subpoena should have been quashed where the only testimony sought was the identity of a broadcast reporter's confidential source.

Applying New York's Shield Law only to "professional journalists and newscasters"