Joseph v. Scranton Times L.P.
Citation | 129 A.3d 404 |
Decision Date | 20 November 2015 |
Docket Number | No. 135 MAP 2014,135 MAP 2014 |
Parties | Thomas A. JOSEPH, Thomas J. Joseph, Acumark, Inc., Airport Limousine and Taxi Service, Inc., Appellees v. The SCRANTON TIMES L.P., The Times Partner, James Conmy and Edward Lewis, Appellants. |
Court | United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania |
Gayle Chatilo Sproul, Esq., Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz, L.L.P., Philadelphia, for Pennsylvania Freedom of Information Coalition, Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association, PA NewsMedia Assoc. & PA Freedom of Information Coalition, Amici Curiae.
Kevin Charles Abbott, Esq., Kim M. Watterson, Esq., Reed Smith LLP, Pittsburgh, John Timothy Hinton, Jr., Esq., Haggerty, McDonnell & Hinton, LLP, for The Scranton Times, L.P., The Times Partner, James Conmy and Edward Lewis.
George Croner, Esq., Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C., Philadelphia, Timothy Paul Polishan, Esq., Old Forge, Kelley Polishan Walsh & Solfanelli, LLC, for Thomas A. Joseph, Thomas J. Joseph, Acumark, Inc., Airport Limousine and Taxi Service Inc.
OPINION
This discretionary appeal concerns a defamation case wherein The Scranton Times L.P., The Times Partner, James Conmy, and Edward Lewis (collectively "the Media Defendants")1 appeal from an order of the Superior Court, which affirmed in part and reversed in part the decision of the Honorable Joseph Van Jura of the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County and granted Thomas A. Joseph, Thomas J. Joseph, Acumark, Inc., and Airport Limousine and Taxi Service, Inc. (collectively "Appellees") a new trial. For the reasons discussed in this opinion, we conclude the Superior Court erred in granting Appellees a new trial, and therefore, we reverse.
This matter arises out of a series of articles written by James Conmy ("Conmy") and Edward Lewis ("Lewis") which appeared from June 1, 2001, to October 10, 2001, in the Citizens' Voice, a newspaper in the Wilkes–Barre/Scranton area owned by The Scranton Times L.P.2 The articles reported about the existence of a federal criminal investigation into the alleged ties of William D'Elia ("D'Elia"), the reputed head of the Bufalino crime family of northeastern Pennsylvania, and Thomas A. Joseph, Sr. ("Joseph, Sr.") to organized crime activities. The articles included information related to, inter alia, the May 31, 2001, execution of search warrants by a large contingent of federal agents and state troopers at the Wilkes–Barre residence of Joseph, Sr., the office of Joseph, Sr.'s business, Acumark, Inc. ("Acumark"), the residence of Samuel Marranca ("Marranca"), the residence of Jeanne Stanton, and the residence of D'Elia. Specifically, the trial court summarized the challenged articles as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Corcoran v. McCabe (In re McCabe), BANKRUPTCY NO. 13-19715
...harm resulting to the plaintiff from its publication; and(7) Abuse of a conditionally privileged occasion. Joseph v. Scranton Times L.P. , 634 Pa. 35, 129 A.3d 404, 424 (2015) (quoting 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 8343(a) (West 2018) ). In addition, a private plaintiff seeking "compensation fo......
-
Goldfarb v. Kalodimos
...harm resulting to the plaintiff from its publication[; and](7) Abuse of a conditionally privileged occasion. Joseph v. Scranton Times, L.P., 634 Pa. 35, 129 A.3d 404, 424 (2015) (quoting 42 Pa.C.S. § 8343(a) ). In a libel action, the court must make a threshold determination of whether a ch......
-
Carroll v. Guardant Health, Inc.
...2010) (citing Labalokie v. Capital Area Intermediate Unit , 926 F. Supp. 503, 509 (M.D. Pa. 1996) ).217 Id.218 Joseph v. Scranton Times L.P. , 634 Pa. 35, 129 A.3d 404, 424 (2015) (quoting 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 8343(a) ).219 Id. (quoting 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 8343(b) ).220 ECF Doc. ......
-
Mallory v. S & S Publishers, CIVIL ACTION NO. 14–5702
...harm resulting to the plaintiff from its publication; and(7) Abuse of a conditionally privileged occasion. Joseph v. Scranton Times, L.P., 634 Pa. 35, 129 A.3d 404, 424 (2015) (quoting 42 Pa. Const. Stat. Ann. § 8343(a)). In a defamation action, the Court must make a threshold determination......