Case Law Index
federal1988
Additional Highlights:First AmendmentParodyIntentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell
United States Supreme Court
Key Holding
Public figures may not recover for intentional infliction of emotional distress based on an offensive parody without showing that the parody contained false statements of fact made with actual malice.
Case Summary
Hustler Magazine v. Falwell extended the New York Times v. Sullivan framework to intentional infliction of emotional distress claims by public figures, holding that the First Amendment protects even outrageous parody that does not contain false statements of fact.
Primary Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/112011/hustler-magazine/