harris/iheartmedia v. Hon. Randall warner/mccarthy

Summary

The Arizona Supreme Court held that none of the nine challenged radio statements about Daniel McCarthy was actionable defamation. Statements (1)–(6) and (9) were rhetorical political invective or subjective impressions that were not reasonably understood as provable assertions of fact, while Statements (7) and (8) were nondefamatory in their political-talk-show context. The court reversed and remanded with instructions to dismiss the complaint with prejudice and declined both parties’ attorney-fee requests.