Case Citator › Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.

Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
418 U.S. 323
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
99 of 99
Citing cases (total)
4,524
Treatment dates
1985
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. is limited among the reviewed cases: all 99 flagged citations have been read, with the 1 confirmed limitation listed below. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc. confined Gertz's requirement of actual malice for presumed and punitive defamation damages to speech involving matters of public concern.
More on how this was screened

The other reviewed opinions followed or applied Gertz's private-figure, fault, actual-malice, and damages framework; reported Gertz's own displacement of Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc. or earlier state defamation rules; reported Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.'s treatment of Gertz's opinion dictum; used nearby treatment language for unrelated authorities or issues; or did not cite Gertz. The two Collin v. Smith citations are duplicate copies of the same opinion, and the Ollman v. Evans citation is a one-line certiorari-denial order with no Gertz discussion.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

4,524 later cases cite Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.; 99 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The Supreme Court confined Gertz's actual-malice requirement for presumed and punitive defamation damages to speech involving matters of public concern.

    Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc. · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    We conclude that permitting recovery of presumed and punitive damages in defamation cases absent a showing of “actual malice” does hot violate the First Amendment when the defamatory statements do not involve matters of public concern.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace