Coursey v. Greater Niles Tp. Pub. Corp.

• Decision Date: 29 May 1968
• Docket Number: No. 40649,40649
• Citation: 40 Ill.2d 257,239 N.E.2d 837
• Parties: William COURSEY, Appellee, v. The GREATER NILES TOWNSHIP PUBLISHING CORPORATION et al., Appellants.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

Page 837

239 N.E.2d 837

40 Ill.2d 257

William COURSEY, Appellee, v. The GREATER NILES TOWNSHIP PUBLISHING CORPORATION et al., Appellants.

No. 40649.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

May 29, 1968.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 24, 1968.

Hoellen & Willens, Chicago (Sherwin Willens, Chicago, of counsel), for appellants.

Gene J. Shapiro and Edward G. Raszus, Chicago, for appellee.

KLUCZYNSKI, Justice.

Plaintiff, William Coursey, a former Skokie, Illinois, patrolman, sued the Greater Niles Township Publishing Corporation and Ronald R. Moore, Jr., for allegedly libelous statements appearing in the September 17, 1964, edition of the Skokie News, a weekly newspaper owned and published by them. Summary judgment for the defendants was entered by the circuit court of Cook County and plaintiff appealed to the Appellate Court, First District, on the grounds that the pleadings presented a genuine issue of fact which should have been tried. The appellate court reversed the judgment of the trial court and remanded the cause for further proceedings (82 Ill.App.2d 76, 227 N.E.2d 164). We have granted leave to appeal.

The appellate court opinion accurately states the facts necessary to disposition of the issues raised in this court; accordingly, we quote from that opinion, beginning with the text of the article forming the basis of the present action.

"Fire Coursey, Tell of Girl's Lie Test.

The teenage girl responsible for having several charges leveled against Skokie Ptm. William Coursey did take a lie detector test--and passed it with 'flying colors'--one day last week, reports Corporation Counsel Marvin Glink.

This was not made public, however, until after the fire and police commission last Wednesday found Coursey guilty of all charges and ordered him discharged from the department.

Coursey had been charged with unbecoming conduct, leaving his beat, leaving the village (both without permission) and failure to carry out a direct order.

The commission's formal decision is not expected to be published until early next week according to chairman Anthony Ross, who, incidentally, will be re-appointed to a new three year term by Mayor Greisdorf very shortly.

Atty. Gene Shapiro, representing the policeman, indicated the case would be presented to the Circuit Court for trial if motions for a rehearing before the commission are denied.

The charges stem from an incident at a Skokie bowling alley one Saturday last April when Coursey found several teens out after curfew, sent some of them home, but allegedly followed--in his squad--the girl as she dropped off a friend in Morton Grove, made immoral suggestions to the girl, then followed her into Lincolnwood.'

'The summary judgment was granted upon the pleadings and upon memoranda of law submitted by both parties. The pleadings consisted of an amended complaint and answer thereto. The amended complaint charged that defendants, intending to injure plaintiff's good name and livelihood and with knowledge that the article was false and with reckless disregard as to whether it was false or not, maliciously composed and caused the article to be published in their newspaper; that the headline was printed in black type, 'Fire Coursey, Tell of Girl's Lie Test', and that defendants by this meant that plaintiff was 'fired from his position with said police department'; that he was disreputable, depraved and of low morals and character and had been 'fired for unbecoming conduct'.

'The defendants' answer admitted the publication of the article, denied any intention to injure the plaintiff, or that the article was maliciously published or that it contained scandalous and malicious libels. In addition an affirmative defense was filed averring that the defamatory construction placed on the article was not reasonable and that the news story was fair and privileged comment on a quasi-judicial proceeding. Following the filing of their answer, defendants made their motion for summary judgment.

'The five charges made to the Fire and Police Commission against the plaintiff are as follows:

'(1) Failure to obey a direct order to submit to a polygraph examination; (2) insubordination, resulting from plaintiff's refusal to submit to a polygraph examination; (3) conduct tending to bring the Skokie Police Department in disrepute, resulting from the alleged improper conduct complained of by the citizen; (4) a technical violation of leaving the assigned 'beat' and (5) a technical violation of failing to properly complete 'activity reports'.'

'The Commission found the plaintiff guilty on four of the five charges, but made no finding on the third charge here involved. Its report on that aspect of the case is as follows:

'3. On Charge #3, No verdict is rendered. While there was much testimony heard concerning the alleged incident, there was also conflict as to times, locations, etc. The Commission, in general, believes that Officer Coursey's conduct on the night in question was unprofessional. He certainly should have handled the situation in a different manner. The Commission feels that there is no need to make a conclusive finding on Charge #3 in view of the decisions on the other charges. The Commission believes that good police procedure would require that an officer who detains juveniles on a curfew violation for any length of time should report the same in a proper fashion to his superiors.' (Emphasis added.)

'The statement in the article that plaintiff was found guilty on all charges was therefore incorrect.' 82 Ill.App.2d 76, 78--81, 227 N.E.2d 164, 167.

On appeal, defendants reasserted their contentions that the article was not defamatory but capable of an 'innocent construction' and that, in any event, it was privileged as a 'fair comment' on government proceedings. The appellate court initially determined, under the authority of Reed v. Albanese, 78 Ill.App.2d 53, 223 N.E.2d 419, and Whitby v. Associates Discount Corp., 59 Ill.App.2d 337, 207 N.E.2d 482, that the words of the article were within those categories which constitute libel Per se since they imputed want of integrity in the discharge of plaintiff's official duties and prejudiced him in his 'profession or trade.' It further determined, taking the words 'in the sense which readers of common and reasonable understanding would attribute to them', that 'The only conclusion that can reasonably be drawn from the article in question is that the plaintiff was guilty of making an immoral suggestion of a sexual character to a teen-aged girl. An innocent reading is not plausible, and summary judgment on this ground was improper.' (82 Ill.App.2d at 82, 227 N.E.2d at 167.) With this holding, we are in accord.

With respect to defendant's contention that the article was a privileged comment on quasi-judicial proceedings, the appellate court correctly stated the controlling principle as expressed in the Restatement of Torts, § 611, that a newspaper is privileged to report the activities of a 'municipal corporation or of a body empowered by law to perform a public duty * * * although it contains matter which is false and defamatory, if it is (a) accurate and complete or a fair abridgement of such proceedings, and (b) not made solely for the purpose of causing harm to the person defamed.'

It then noted that the Restatement position was adopted by this court in Lulay v. Peoria Journal-Star, 34 Ill.2d 112, 115, 214 N.E.2d 746, with that decision being followed by appellate courts in subsequent cases. (E.g., Segall v. Lindsay-Schaub Newspapers, Inc., 68 Ill.App.2d 209, 215, 215 N.E.2d 295.) However, the court held that 'These decisions are distinguishable from the instant case, for here the defendants published what turned out to be an Inaccurate account of the proceedings of the Fire and Police Commission. The error was therefore solely attributable to the defendants and hence the matter is not within the privilege hereinbefore discussed.' 82 Ill.App.2d at 83, 227 N.E.2d at 168.

Were the propriety of the foregoing holdings of the appellate court the sole issue in this court, we would be constrained to affirm that court's decision, notwithstanding defendants' repeated urging that it too strictly applies the requirement of an accurate and fair report of public proceedings. It is true that the Commission did find the plaintiff guilty on four of the five charges brought against him. However, the one charge which it rendered no verdict on ('(3) conduct tending to bring the Skokie Police Department in disrepute, resulting from the alleged improper conduct complained of by the citizen') clearly encompassed the 'sting or gist' of the allegedly libelous statements. As such, the article is not an accurate or fair account of the Commission's proceedings, thereby precluding defendants from invoking the fair comment privilege.

The question remains, however, whether the alleged defamatory material is within the ambit of constitutional protection enunciated in New York Times Co. v....