background preloader

Hustler Magazine Case Law

Facebook Twitter

Spence v. Flynt, 816 P. 2d 771 - Wyo: Supreme Court 1991. 816 P.2d 771 (1991) Gerry L. SPENCE and the Spence Foundation for People's Attorneys, Inc., Appellants (Plaintiffs) Cross-Appellees, v. Larry FLYNT; Althea Flynt; L.F.P., Inc., a California corporation; Larry Flynt Publications; Hustler Magazine, Inc., a California corporation; Flynt Distributing Company, a California corporation; Flynt Subscription Company, a Nevada corporation; LFZ, Ltd., a B.W.I. corporation; Island Distributing, Inc., a B.W.I. corporation; David Kahn; Jim Goode, Doug Oliver; N. Morgen Hagen; Lonn M. Friend; Inland Empire Periodicals, an Oregon corporation; and Park Place Market, Inc., a Wyoming corporation, Appellees (Defendants) Cross-Appellants. Nos. 89-17, 89-18. Supreme Court of Wyoming. August 8, 1991. Petition for Rehearing Denied September 16, 1991. 772*772 Gerry L. Alan L. Before CARDINE, C.J., and THOMAS, URBIGKIT, MACY and GOLDEN, JJ.

CARDINE, Justice. We reverse the summary judgment and affirm the order denying the motion to disqualify Spence's counsel. "1. "2. State v. Flynt, 63 Ohio St. 2d 132 - Ohio: Supreme Court 1980. 63 Ohio St. 2d 132 (1980) THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. FLYNT ET AL., APPELLANTS. No. 79-556. Supreme Court of Ohio. Decided July 16, 1980. 134*134 Ms. Almeta Johnson, chief police prosecutor, and Mr. Messrs. Per Curiam. The law is well settled that the government is subject to constitutional restraints in its choice of those whom it may prosecute. The conscious exercise of some selectivity in enforcement is not in itself, however, a violation of the United States Constitution.

Applying these principles to the instant cause it must be conceded that defendants demonstrated that other magazines with a format similar to Hustler, sold in the same stores as that magazine, were not yet being prosecuted, although the authorities were aware of their existence and general content. In addition, the defendants did not establish that Hustler alone would be prosecuted. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.[2] Judgment affirmed. CELEBREZZE, C. PAUL W. "Mr. 787 F.2d 592. United States Postal Service v. Hustler Magazine, 630 F. Supp. 867 - Dist. Court, Dist. of Columbia 1986.

630 F.Supp. 867 (1986) UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Plaintiff, v. HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC., LFP, Inc. Larry Flynt Publications, and Larry C. Flynt, Defendants. Civ. A. United States District Court, District of Columbia. March 11, 1986. R. Mark Foster, Washington, D.C., for defendants. JOHN H. This case presents the novel question of whether the statutory prohibition against mailing certain pandering advertisements, 39 U.S.C. § 3008, is constitutional where the "addressee" is a Member of Congress. The facts of this case are not in dispute. The beneficiaries of this mailing did not all appreciate Larry Flynt's munificence on their behalf. More than thirty days after receipt of these prohibitory orders, Hustler Magazine, Inc. and F.S.C., Inc. mailed a second issue of Hustler to the Members of Congress named in the orders. On February 13, 1985, the Postal Service brought the present action against Hustler Magazine, Inc.; LFP, Inc.; Larry Flynt Publications; and Larry Flynt.

Wildmon v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 508 F. Supp. 87 - Dist. Court, ND Mississippi 1980. 508 F.Supp. 87 (1980) Don WILDMON, Plaintiff, v. HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC., Larry Flynt, Ed Miller and John Ferguson, Defendants. No. EC 79-225-OS-P. United States District Court, N. D. Mississippi, E. December 12, 1980. 88*88 James P. Alex A. ORMA R. This action is presently before the court on motion for summary judgment by defendants Hustler Magazine, Inc., Larry Flynt, Ed Miller and John Ferguson.[1] As grounds for their motion, defendants assert that plaintiff's action is barred by the one-year statute of limitations found in Miss. On October 9, 1979, plaintiff commenced this action for libel, slander, and invasion of privacy resulting from the publication of an article in Hustler magazine. It is clear that the one year limitation provision found in Miss.Code Ann. § 15-1-35 governs this action. In Forman v. [A] cause of action "accrues" when it comes into existence as an enforceable claim, that is, when the right to sue becomes vested. 14 So.2d at 346-47.

Edwards v. The affidavits of Mr. Gallon v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 732 F. Supp. 322 - Dist. Court, ND New York 1990. 732 F.Supp. 322 (1990) Sabrina GALLON, Plaintiff, v. HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC., Defendant. No. 84-CV-353. United States District Court, N.D. March 12, 1990. Order March 23, 1990. 323*323 Rinaldi, Rinaldi & Cognetti, Syracuse, N.Y. Lombardi, Devorsetz, Stinziano & Smith, Syracuse, N.Y. McAVOY, District Judge. The case presently before this Court is an action brought by Ms. Findings of Fact 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Conclusions of Law 1. 2. Any person whose name, portrait or picture is used within this state for advertising or the purposes of trade without the written consent first obtained ... may maintain an equitable action ... and may also sue and recover damages. The defendant clearly is in violation of section 51 of the Civil Rights Law, and such violation proximately caused emotional harm to the plaintiff which now requires psychotherapy as treatment. 3. 4.

This is an addendum to the Order of March 9, 1990 of this Court granting the Plaintiff, Ms. Blackman v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 620 F. Supp. 792 - Dist. Court, Dist. of Columbia 1985. 620 F.Supp. 792 (1985) Barry M. BLACKMAN, Plaintiff, v. HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC., Defendant. Civ. A. No. 76-2103. United States District Court, District of Columbia. May 30, 1985. 793*793 794*794 Aidan D. Angelo V. JOYCE HENS GREEN, District Judge. In a previously-entered Memorandum Opinion and Judgment, defendant Hustler Magazine, Inc. Barry M. On September 2, 1976, Blackman filed two copies of 53 of these photographs with the United States Register of Copyrights, who thereupon issued Blackman Certificates of Registration of a Claim to Copyright covering all 53 of the photographs.

On June 14 and 15, 1976, Blackman announced, through the news media, that he was the photographer and owner of nude pictures of Elizabeth Ray, and that rights to publish those photographs were available for purchase. The following day, Blackman sent a telegram to Hustler, which was received by Hustler, stating: As you know, I represent Barry M. Mr. A. 1. Handelman v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 469 F. Supp. 1048 - Dist. Court, SD New York 1978. 469 F.Supp. 1048 (1978) Philip HANDELMAN, Plaintiff, v. HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC. and Larry C. Flynt and Kevin Cash, Defendants. No. 77 CIV 3666 (LBS). United States District Court, S.

October 12, 1978. 1049*1049 Philip Handelman, pro se. Jack N. SAND, District Judge. Jurisdiction in this libel action is based upon diversity of citizenship. In his complaint, plaintiff states that he is the attorney who represented the executor of the Loeb estate. Under New York law,[3] the plaintiff must show that a libelous statement was published "of and concerning him". "the libel designates the plaintiff in such a way as to let those who knew him understand that he was the person meant. Moreover, it is for the jury to decide whether a written defamatory statement applies to plaintiff. Defendants argue that this sentence does not refer to plaintiff. "[i]t is clear that . . . the object of the sentence is Mr. Clearly, the primary target of the article is Mr. See also Shenkman v. More recently, in November v. Morgan v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 653 F. Supp. 711 - Dist. Court, ND Ohio 1987.

À propos de cette page Nos systèmes ont détecté un trafic exceptionnel sur votre réseau informatique. Cette page permet de vérifier que c'est bien vous qui envoyez des requêtes, et non un robot. Que s'est-il passé ? Cette page s'affiche lorsque Google détecte automatiquement des requêtes émanant de votre réseau informatique qui semblent enfreindre les Conditions d'utilisation. Le blocage prendra fin peu après l'arrêt de ces requêtes. En attendant, la saisie de l'image CAPTCHA ci-dessus vous permettra de continuer à utiliser nos services.

Des applications malveillantes, un plug-in de navigateur ou un script qui envoie des requêtes automatiques peuvent être à l'origine de ce trafic. Vous pouvez être invité à saisir les caractères de l'image CAPTCHA si vous utilisez des termes avancés auxquels les robots ont recours ou si vous envoyez des requêtes très rapidement.

Adresse IP : 188.165.248.41Heure : 2014-04-14T13:30:58ZURL : Ashby v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 802 F. 2d 856 - Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit 1986. 802 F.2d 856 (1986) Ursula ASHBY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC., Defendant-Appellee. No. 85-5705. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Argued June 13, 1986. Decided October 2, 1986. Rehearing Denied November 24, 1986. 857*857 James E. M. Before KRUPANSKY and BOGGS, Circuit Judges; and PORTER, Senior District Judge.[*] KRUPANSKY, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff-appellant Ursula Ashby (Ashby) appealed from an order of the district court granting summary judgment to defendant-appellee Hustler Magazine, Inc.

In early December of 1980, Ashby's roommate Teresa Davis (Davis) convinced her to pose for nude photographs in their Louisville, Kentucky apartment. Approximately two weeks after posing for the photographs, Ashby accompanied Davis to Indianapolis for a Christmas holiday at the home of Davis' mother. Ashby's brother hosted "a couple of wild parties" at the apartment. Defendant Hustler publishes Hustler Magazine (the "magazine"). Wood v. McCall, supra, 623 S.W.2d at 888. St. Byrd v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 433 So. 2d 593 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 4th Dist. 1983.

433 So.2d 593 (1983) Julian BYRD, Appellant/Cross Appellee, v. HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC., a Foreign Corporation, Appellee/Cross Appellant. No. 81-2410. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. June 8, 1983. Rehearing Denied July 13, 1983. 594*594 DiGiulian, Spellacy & DiChiara, Fort Lauderdale, and Larry Klein, West Palm Beach, for appellant/cross appellee. Larry S. HURLEY, Judge. The pivotal question in this libel case is whether a picture and its caption must be viewed as a composite to determine if the publication is defamatory. Julian Byrd, a professional model, posed for a Viceroy cigarette advertising campaign. Mr. Hustler defended on two grounds. The case was submitted to a jury which returned a verdict for Mr. 595*595 "Defamation (libel and slander) may generally be defined as the unprivileged publication of false statements which naturally and proximately result in injury to another.

" The false statement of fact in this case, according to Mr. In the instant case, Mr. Mr. Blackman v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 800 F. 2d 1160 - Court of Appeals, Dist. of Columbia Circuit 1986. 800 F.2d 1160 (1986) Barry M. BLACKMAN, v. HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC., Appellant. Barry M. Nos. 85-5849, 85-5889. United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. Argued May 8, 1986. Decided August 29, 1986. Norman Zafman, Beverly Hills, Cal., a member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of Cal., pro hac vice by special leave of Court, with whom Mark W. Bruce R. 1161*1161 Before EDWARDS, BORK and KOZINSKI,[*] Circuit Judges. Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge KOZINSKI. KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge: Encrypted in this story about nude photographs, shoddy business ethics, politics and unexpected riches lies a question about the calculation of damages for copyright infringement. Background Barry M. In 1976 Ray became something of a celebrity.

Blackman sent his agent, William Tucker, to meet with Flynt in Las Vegas on June 16, 1976. Blackman and Flynt never reached agreement. Proceedings Below The parties then proceeded to try damages. The district court rejected this approach. 17 U.S.C.A. Faloona v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 607 F. Supp. 1341 - Dist. Court, ND Texas 1985. 607 F.Supp. 1341 (1985) Kelly FALOONA and Brandon Faloona, by their next friend, Linda FREDRICKSON, Plaintiffs, v. HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC., Defendant. No. CA 3-79-0056-R. United States District Court, N.D. May 2, 1985. 1342*1342 Gregory L. 1343*1343 John Anderson, David Donaldson, Graves, Doherty, Hearon & Moody, Austin, Tex., for defendant. BUCHMEYER, District Judge. This right of privacy suit involves the publication of nude pictures of the plaintiffs in two issues of Hustler.

The plaintiffs, Kelly and Brandon Faloona, are both minors. "... is potentially a landmark case and stands on the threshold of ushering in the formal announcement of a standard of care for skin magazines desiring to use the photographs of nude children, that standard being that they must first obtain court approval. The nude pictures of the minor plaintiffs were — with the consent of their mother/next friend, Linda Fredrickson — first published in 1977, when Kelly was eleven and Brandon was nine.

A. B. 1348*1348 c. D. Haberman v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 626 F. Supp. 201 - Dist. Court, D. Massachusetts 1986. 626 F.Supp. 201 (1986) James D. HABERMAN, Plaintiff, v. HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC., et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 84-151-W. United States District Court, D. January 2, 1986. 202*202 203*203 204*204 Herbert L. William H. WOLF, District Judge. Plaintiff, James D. For the reasons discussed below, the court has determined that defendants did not infringe plaintiff's copyright under federal law and that no violation of ch. 93A has been established.

The court hereby finds the facts of this case as follows: Plaintiff James D. Defendants are Hustler Magazine, Inc., a California corporation located in Los Angeles, California which publishes Hustler magazine, and Flynt Distributing Co., a corporation responsible for the distribution of Hustler magazine.

Haberman markets his photographs as fine art photographs and postcards. The sale of Haberman's works in postcard form was begun in Fall, 1980. Haberman's copyright in "Cracking Eggs" is registered with the United States Copyright Office. 1. Brewer v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 749 F. 2d 527 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 1984. 749 F.2d 527 (1984) James BREWER, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v.

HUSTLER MAGAZINE, INC., Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee. C.A. Nos. 83-6240, 83-6291. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted September 6, 1984. Decided September 28, 1984. 528*528 Louise Nemschoff, Paul D. Michael A. Before TUTTLE,[*] and HUG and BEEZER, Circuit Judges. BEEZER, Circuit Judge: James Brewer brought this action against Hustler Magazine, Inc. In 1974, Brewer created a photograph, which, with the use of special effects, simulates Brewer shooting himself through the head. On May 10, 1982, Brewer registered his claim to a copyright in the photograph with the United States Copyright Office.

I. We may disturb a jury verdict only if the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law. A. B. Hustler claims that its publication constituted a fair use of the photograph. Second, we must consider "the nature of the copyrighted work. " C. II. A. B. C. Ault v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 860 F. 2d 877 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 1988. About this page Our systems have detected unusual traffic from your computer network. This page checks to see if it's really you sending the requests, and not a robot. Why did this happen? This page appears when Google automatically detects requests coming from your computer network which appear to be in violation of the Terms of Service. The block will expire shortly after those requests stop. This traffic may have been sent by malicious software, a browser plug-in, or a script that sends automated requests. Sometimes you may be asked to solve the CAPTCHA if you are using advanced terms that robots are known to use, or sending requests very quickly.

IP address: 188.165.248.41Time: 2014-04-14T13:24:02ZURL: Guccione v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 800 F. 2d 298 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 1986. Wood v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 736 F. 2d 1084 - Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit 1984. Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Moral Majority, Inc., 796 F. 2d 1148 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 1986. Dworkin v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 867 F. 2d 1188 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 1989. Herceg v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 814 F. 2d 1017 - Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit 1987. Douglass v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 769 F. 2d 1128 - Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 1985.

Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 465 US 770 - Supreme Court 1984. Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 US 46 - Supreme Court 1988.