Bentkowski v. Scene Magazine
637 F.3d 689
| 6th Cir. | 2011Background
- Bentkowski is Mayor of Seven Hills, Ohio, who sued defaming defendants in a Cleveland Scene article (Aug. 1, 2007).
- The article, The Bizarre Boy Mayor, alleged his letter to residents 18–40ish invited misuse of personal information and implied improper motives.
- Bentkowski claimed two defamatory portions: stunts limiting resident feedback and a letter to young residents with potentially illicit data collection.
- The suit was filed Aug. 1, 2008 in Ohio state court and removed to the Northern District of Ohio; discovery deadlines were set by the district court.
- The district court later granted summary judgment to defendants, finding the article was protected opinion under the Ohio Constitution and that Bentkowski failed to prove actual malice; it also sanctioned and struck Bentkowski’s amended complaint for discovery/prosecution failures.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the article protected opinion under the Ohio Constitution? | Bentkowski argues it asserted facts and motives actionable as defamation. | Appellees contend the piece is opinion and not actionable. | Yes; the article is protected opinion under Ohio law. |
| Did Bentkowski show actual malice to defeat public-official defamation claim? | Bentkowski claims factual falsity and actual malice. | Defendants argue absence of actual malice. | District court’s finding of no actual malice stands; summary judgment affirmed. |
| Did the district court abuse its discretion in denying discovery extension? | Bentkowski seeks more non-expert discovery. | No abuse of discretion given diligence concerns. | No abuse of discretion; extension denied. |
| Did the district court abuse its discretion in sanctioning and striking the amended complaint? | Sanctions were excessive and unwarranted. | Sanctions appropriate for failure to prosecute and other misconduct. | No abuse of discretion; sanctions upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1990) (no wholesale defamation exemption for opinion; not per se actionable as fact)
- Vail v. The Plain Dealer Publ’g Co., 72 Ohio St.3d 279 (Ohio 1995) (opinion protection under Ohio Constitution; factors for determining fact vs. opinion)
- Scott v. News-Herald, 496 N.E.2d 707 (Ohio 1986) (verifiability and context shaping actionability; categorization as opinion or fact)
- Wampler v. Higgins, 93 Ohio St.3d 111 (Ohio 2001) (language, verifiability, general and broader context in opinion analysis)