Possible. Or perhaps, at least
as to defamation law, the judge believed that in fact, most people would
respect others' decisions to switch religions -- even if they disagree with such
a decision -- and thus would not subject the switcher to contempt, derision, or
obloquy. Likewise, perhaps as to false light law, the judge believed that
it would not be "highly offensive to a reasonable person" (I quote here the
Restatement of Torts) to misrepresent his religion (naturally a much more
subjective judgment).
Incidentally, what's the
current law on whether it's defamatory to falsely call someone black?
My understanding is that this used to lead to successful defamation
lawsuits in the past, but I wonder whether it might be rejected today
-- either based on the judge's perception that such allegations are in fact
not defamatory, or as a legal judgment that the legal system ought not take into
account such prejudices. If people know the current law on this area, I'd
love to hear it.
Eugene
-----Original Message-----Do we know anything about the judge in this case; I realize judges are *supposed* to not bring their religious beliefs into the courtroom, but having testified against Chief Justice Roy Moore of Alabama, I know that is not always the case. Perhaps this judge is so certain of her own religous views that she cannot comprehend how anyone would find such an allegation offensive or defamatory.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Finkelman
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 4:43 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: not defamatory to call Jew a believer in Jesus-- Paul Finkelman Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law University of Tulsa College of Law 3120 East 4th Place Tulsa, OK 74104-3189 918-631-3706 (office) 918-631-2194 (fax) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Volokh, Eugene wrote:
Interestingly, the court also dismissed a false light invasion of privacy cause of action, which would normally not require proof of injury to reputation.-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 3:46 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: not defamatory to call Jew a believer in Jesus May 17, 2004 According to a story in the current issue of The Forward, Florida circuit court judge Catherin Brunson dismissed a libel case brought by a Jewish woman against Jews for Jesus. The plaintiff alleged that the organization had published an announcement that the plaintiff had tearfully accepted the beliefs of Jews for Jesus as her husband lay dying, presumably his deathbed request. The court dismissed the suit on the ground that it was not defamatory to label someone a believer in Jesus or a Christian. Louise _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
