A.R.S. 12-641, 12-651
Persons who may maintain action for injury to child or ward(12-641)
Either parent may maintain an action for the injury of a child, and a guardian may maintain an action for the injury of his ward.
Uniform single publication act (12-651)
A. No person shall have more than one cause of action for damages for libel, slander, invasion of privacy or any other tort founded upon a single publication, exhibition or utterance, such as any one edition of a newspaper, book or magazine, any one presentation to an audience, any one broadcast over radio or television or any one exhibition of a motion picture. Recovery in any action shall include all damages for any such tort suffered by the plaintiff in all jurisdictions.
B. A judgment in any jurisdiction for or against the plaintiff upon the substantive merits of any action for damages founded upon a single publication, exhibition or utterance as described in subsection A shall bar any other action for damages by the same plaintiff against the same defendant founded upon the same publication, exhibition or utterance.
C. This section shall be so interpreted as to effectuate its purpose to make uniform the law of those states or jurisdictions which enact it.
D. This section may be cited as the uniform single publication act.
E. This section shall not be retroactive as to causes of action existing on July 1, 1953.
Phoenix Arizona Personal Injury Attorneys
Arizona Lawyer Pedestrian Accident
Phoenix Abogado, Lesiones Personales, Criminal y DUI
A.R.S. 12-652
Liability of radio or television station owner or agent for defamation published or uttered over station or network
A. The owner, licensee or operator of a visual or sound radio broadcasting station or network of stations, and the agents or employees of the owner, licensee or operator, shall not be liable for damages for a defamatory statement published or uttered in or as a part of a visual or sound radio broadcast by one other than the owner, licensee or operator, or agent or employee thereof, unless it is alleged and proved by the complaining party that the owner, licensee, operator or agent or employee has failed to exercise due care to prevent publication or utterance of the statement in the broadcast. The exercise of due care shall be construed to include a bona fide compliance with federal law or regulations of a federal regulatory agency.
B. An owner, licensee or operator, or the agents or employees of such owner, licensee or operator of a station or network of stations shall not be liable for damages for defamatory statements published or uttered over the facilities of such station or network by or on behalf of a candidate for public office.
C. In an action for damages for a defamatory statement published or uttered in or as a part of a visual or sound radio broadcast, the complaining party shall be allowed only the actual damages alleged and proved.
A.R.S. 12-653, 12-653.01
Nonliability for publication made at instance of public officer acting in compliance with law (12-653)
An action for damages shall not lie against the editor, publisher, or proprietor of a newspaper or periodical for publication of a report, proceedings or other matter published at the instance of a public officer acting in compliance with law.
Definitions (12-653.01)
In this article, unless the context otherwise requires:
1. "Actual malice" means that state of mind arising from personal spite, hatred, or ill will toward the plaintiff, but such a state of mind occasioned by a good faith belief on the part of the defendant in the truth of the libelous publication or broadcast at the time it is published or broadcast shall not constitute actual malice.
2. "Exemplary damages" means damages which may, in the discretion of the court or jury, be recovered in addition to general and special damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing a defendant who has made the publication or broadcast with actual malice.
3. "General damages" means damages for loss of reputation.
4. "Magazine" or "newspaper" means any publication which may be mailed at the second-class rates established by the United States post office.
5. "Special damages" means all damages which the plaintiff alleges and proves he has suffered in respect only to his property, business, trade, profession or occupation.
Phoenix Family Law and Divorce Lawyer
Phoenix Auto Accident Attorneys, Arizona Highway Lawyer
Phoenix Injury and Accident Attorneys
A.R.S. 12-653.02, 12-653.03
Failure to demand or publish or broadcast correction; publication with actual malice; damages; service of demand (12-653.02)
In an action for damages for the publication of a libel in a newspaper or magazine, or of a slander by radio or television broadcast, the plaintiff shall recover no more than special damages unless a correction is demanded and not published or broadcast, unless the plaintiff shall prove the publication or broadcast was made with actual malice. The plaintiff shall serve upon the publisher at the place of publication, or broadcaster at the place of broadcast, a written notice specifying the statements claimed to be libelous and demanding that the same be corrected. The notice and demand shall be served within twenty days after actual knowledge of the plaintiff of the publication or broadcast of the statements claimed to be libelous.
Failure to publish or broadcast correction; recovery of special and exemplary damages; malice (12-653.03)
If a correction is demanded within the period prescribed by section 12-653.02, and is not published or broadcast in substantially as conspicuous a manner in the newspaper or magazine, or on the radio or television broadcasting station, as the statements claimed to be libelous, in a regular issue thereof published or broadcast within three weeks after service, plaintiff, if he pleads and proves the notice, demand and failure to correct, and if his cause of action is maintained, may recover general, special and exemplary damages subject to applicable rules of law governing such damages in this jurisdiction, but no exemplary damages may be recovered unless the plaintiff proves that defendant made the publication or broadcast with actual malice and then only in the discretion of the court or jury.
Abogado Phoenix Arizona, Lesiones Personales