![James M. Sprouse v. Clay Communication](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![James M. Sprouse v. Clay Communication](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
James M. Sprouse v. Clay Communication
1975.WV.88, 211 S.E.2D 674, 158 W.VA. 427
-
- $0.99
-
- $0.99
Publisher Description
A candidate for political office is governed by the same rules with regard to recovery for libel as a public official and can sustain an action for libel only if he can prove that: (1) the alleged libelous statements were false or misleading; (2) the statements tended to defame the plaintiff and reflect shame, contumely, and disgrace upon him; (3) the statements were published with knowledge at the time of publication that they were false or misleading or were published with a reckless and willful disregard of truth; and, (4) the publisher intended to injure the plaintiff through the knowing or reckless publication of the alleged libelous material.
More Books by Fourth Circuit U.S. Court Of Appeals
[U] Christian Science Board of Directors of the First Church of Christ Scientist v. Robinson
2001
Hampton Audio Electronics, Inc. v. Contel Cellular, Inc.
1994
Cooper v. Smith & Nephew
2001
[U] Turner v. United States Department of Agriculture
2000
[U] Cruzado-Goicochea v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service
1999
Razzaq v. Old Dominion University
1999