Yeagle v. Collegiate Times^[1]

Facts: Sharon Yeagle was the Assistant to the Vice President of Students Affairs and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. One of Yeagle's duties was to help students apply to the Governor's Fellows Program. The school newspaper published an article describing the university's success in placing students and included a quote from Yeagle. Under Yeagle's name in the article was the phrase "Director of Butt Licking." Yeagle sued the Collegiate Times for defamation and the trial court dismissed the case. Yeagle appealed.

1. What is the issue in this case? What question does the court need to answer to resolve this case?

1. What is the rule of law in this case? Remember, the rule of law is the legal principle the court relies upon to resolve the issue.

1. Which specific element of the rule is in question in this case?

Next, read the Holding of the case below, then complete the exercise that follows.

Holding: Judgment for Collegiate Times affirmed. A plaintiff only gets a trial if there are facts in dispute or if the law could be interpreted in more than one way. Neither was true in this case. The court held that the phrase was no more than rhetorical hyperbole. Although the phrase was disgusting, offensive, and in bad taste, it could not reasonably be understood as stating an actual fact about Yeagle's job title or her conduct, or that she committed a crime of moral turpitude. The phrase could not be read in a vacuum, however. The same phrase appearing on the front page of a national newspaper would lead to a very different interpretation of their meaning. The context was a collegiate newspaper. Yeagle's assertion that the phrase demonstrated a lack of integrity in the performance of her duties also failed. The phrase could not reasonably be considered as conveying factual information about Yeagle, thus it did not support a cause of action for defamation.

1. Underline the text that illustrates the rule of law in this case.

1. Highlight the text that illustrates the court's analysis of the case in a color of your choice.

1. What was the court's conclusion in this case?