Flynn v. Cable News Network, Inc.
- Subramanian
- 1:21-cv-02587
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Flynn v. Cable News Network, Judge Subramanian ordered supplemental briefing on whether calling plaintiffs QAnon followers was a non-actionable opinion.
The plaintiffs and Cable News Network, Inc., through their counsel, were affected by the supplemental-briefing deadlines.
What happened
In Flynn v. Cable News Network, Inc., the court asked the parties for more briefing on whether CNN allegedly stated or implied that the plaintiffs were “QAnon followers.”
The requested briefing concerns whether that statement or implication is a non-actionable opinion under the First Amendment and Rhode Island law. The order did not decide that issue or rule on the parties’ summary-judgment motions.
Judge Arun Subramanian ordered CNN to file a letter of no more than three single-spaced pages by February 16, 2024, and the plaintiffs to file a letter of the same length by February 23, 2024.
The detailed version
- Flynn v. Cable News Network, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-02587
- Subramanian
- Feb. 8, 2024
Order
After reviewing the parties’ briefs supporting and opposing summary judgment, the court requested supplemental briefing on one issue: whether CNN’s alleged statement or implication that the plaintiffs were “QAnon followers” is a non-actionable opinion under the First Amendment and Rhode Island law.
Briefing requirements
The court directed counsel to conduct their own research and consider authorities including Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., Cheng v. Neumann, Biro v. Conde Nast, Beattie v. Fleet National Bank, Healey v. New England Newspapers, Inc., and section 566 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts.
CNN was ordered to submit a letter of no more than three single-spaced pages by February 16, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. The plaintiffs were ordered to submit a letter of the same length by February 23, 2024, at 5:00 p.m.
What the court decided
This order requested additional briefing. It did not decide whether the alleged statement was opinion, whether it was actionable, or whether either party was entitled to summary judgment.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.