This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: 2. Although the word pimp may be reasonably capable of a defamatory meaning when read in isolation, we agree with the district courts assessment that the term loses its meaning when considered in the context of this case where it appeared among other photos using loose, figurative slang language directed at a younger, lighthearted audience. The term pimp as used on the ESPN.com website was not intended as a criminal accusation, nor was it reasonably susceptible to such a literal interpretation. Ironically it was most likely intended as a compliment. But we need not definitively resolve that issue here because even if the photograph and caption are reasonably capable of a defamatory meaning, they are not actionable under the First Amendment. 5. The bank was not held liable in the case. It is not reasonable for a bank to garantee the safety of its customers under such circumstances. More recent cases have expanded business liability for crime. If it is a known high crime location it would be unreasonable for a bank to "attract" its for crime....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 02/29/2012 for the course BUSINESS 101 taught by Professor Monastersky during the Spring '10 term at Bergen Community College.
- Spring '10
- Business Law