Massachusetts Appeals Court Upholds Ruling in Favor of Former M.I.T. Student; Ruling Affirms...

Business Editors and Legal Writers

BOSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 9, 2002

A former M.I.T. student reporter has emerged victorious again on appeal eight years after being sued for libel by Wellesley College professor Tony Martin, who had claimed that the student had damaged his

The Massachusetts Appeals Court on Wednesday, May 8, affirmed the December 1998 ruling of Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Judith Fabricant, who found, after trial, that the First Amendment protected student Avik Roy's inaccurate report that Martin, then professor of Africana Studies at Wellesley, had obtained tenure "only after successfully suing the college for racial discrimination." In fact, Martin's claims of race discrimination did not find their way into a lawsuit until after he gained tenure - a fact that the student newspaper later reported in a correction.

The case made history, as it was the only libel claim against a student journalist ever to go to trial in Massachusetts.

"It seemed to us that the student was being picked on, and that offended our sense of justice," said Robert A. Bertsche, an attorney at the Boston law firm of Hill & Barlow, who represented the student pro bono. "Professor Martin had been the subject of unflattering publicity from everyone from David Brinkley to Ted Koppel, and from the Boston Globe to the Washington Post. And whom does he choose to sue? An impecunious graduate student without the assets to defend himself. Fortunately, we had the First Amendment on his side, and I'm thrilled that we were able to demonstrate that." Attorney Jennifer Chiasson assisted Bertsche, who is co-chair of Hill & Barlow's Media and Entertainment Group, on appeal.

In Wednesday's ruling, the Appeals Court ruled that Professor Martin was a public figure when the student, Avik Roy, published the article about him in Counterpoint, a joint M.I.T.-Wellesley student publication, in September 1993. As a public figure, Martin could not win a libel claim unless he could show that Roy knew the statement was false or acted with "reckless disregard of whether it was false." Roy testified at trial that he had relied on a confidential source (whom he did not name) who had proven reliable in the past, and believed at the time that the information was true.

The Appeals Court also noted that Martin had sparked nationwide controversy in 1991 by using a book published by the Nation of Islam, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, as a scholarly text in his Wellesley College classroom. The book argues that Jews played a leading role in the African slave trade. Its publication led to calls by prominent Jewish groups for revocation of Martin's tenure. A Washington Post op-ed writer said he should be fired, and the Boston Globe editorialized that Martin was recycling Nazi propaganda. Martin responded in 1993 by publishing another book, called The Jewish Onslaught: Despatches [sic] from the Wellesley Battlefront, recounting the criticism he received.

Although Martin argued to the Appeals Court that he was not a public figure in 1993, the court rejected that argument. It also rejected various other arguments advanced by Martin's counsel, including an attack on the judge as biased and on opposing counsel for introducing evidence that Martin had been widely criticized as anti-Semitic. In this case, the criticism of Martin on that score was relevant to his public figure status.

"This decision should be a clarion call to student journalists everywhere: the First Amendment protects you to the same extent that it protects professional reporters," said Bertsche. "Student journalists need to be careful in their reporting, but they don't have to be intimidated into avoiding controversial topics. If an honest mistake is made, as happened here, the law will protect you."

Hill & Barlow's Media and Entertainment Group

Hill & Barlow provides both business advice and litigation services to individuals and companies engaged in journalism, broadcasting, publishing, entertainment, and a wide range of creative endeavors. Its practice reaches well beyond New England, to New York, Los Angeles, and throughout the nation and abroad. The firm regularly represents book, magazine, and newspaper publishers; broadcasters and cablecasters; advertisers; individuals and entities in the film, television, and entertainment industry; e-commerce and other Web sites; Internet service providers and content providers; and writers, authors, reporters, editors, and producers in all of those fields. As part of an exclusive partnership, the firm also hosts an extremely active Media Law Hotline for members of the New England Press Association.