Kinsey v. New York Times Co., 991 F.3d 171

Gwynn X. Kinsey Jr. worked in the DOJ Capital Case Section; in May 2017 he had sexual contact with an intern at a D.C. bar and was later reassigned.
A civil suit by Jacabed Rodriguez‑Coss included seven declarations, one by intern Luke Woolman describing the Proper 21 incident and calling Kinsey’s conduct “unwelcome.”
The New York Times published an investigative article quoting Woolman’s declaration and displaying portions of the declaration online.
Kinsey sued the Times for defamation, alleging the characterization “unwelcome” was false and defamatory per se.
The District Court applied New York law and dismissed the complaint under New York’s fair report privilege; Kinsey appealed.
The Second Circuit affirmed, concluding New York law governs and the article was a fair and true report of an official proceeding protected by Section 74.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Choice of law — which state’s law governs?	Kinsey: D.C. law applies because the conduct occurred and the reputational injury arose in D.C.	Times: New York law applies because the Times is domiciled in NY and the article emanated from NY; NY has stronger policy interests.	Court: NY choice‑of‑law rules apply; actual conflict exists (NY absolute privilege vs. D.C. qualified); NY has the most significant relationship, so NY law governs.
Application of fair report privilege	Kinsey: Article failed to make clear the quoted language was from an official court filing, so the absolute privilege doesn’t attach.	Times: Article fairly and substantially accurately reported declarations filed in litigation; ordinary reader would understand it reported an official proceeding.	Court: Ordinary reader could tell the article quoted declarations filed in litigation; the fair report privilege applies and bars Kinsey’s claim.

Biro v. Condé Nast, 807 F.3d 541 (2d Cir. 2015) (pleading/motion‑to‑dismiss standard in media defamation suits)
DiFolco v. MSNBC Cable L.L.C., 622 F.3d 104 (2d Cir. 2010) (12(b)(6) standards for defamation pleadings)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility pleading standard)
Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Elec. Mfg. Co., 313 U.S. 487 (1941) (federal courts in diversity apply forum state choice‑of‑law rules)
Lee v. Bankers Trust Co., 166 F.3d 540 (2d Cir. 1999) (New York’s interest‑analysis approach to defamation choice of law)
Friedman v. Bloomberg L.P., 884 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 2017) (New York fair report privilege: substantial accuracy and ordinary‑reader test)