Lohrenz v. Donnelly

Facts

P served as a member of the United States Navy following graduation from college in 1990, and continued to serve in the Navy until early 1999. She graduated near the top of her class and was allowed to select jets. A personnel specialist in the Bureau of Naval Personnel advised P that, because women jet pilots were only permitted to fly noncombat planes and all noncombat jets were being decommissioned, the Navy had no place for women jet pilots; she could either temporarily serve as a flight instructor or leave the Navy. But, the Navy changed its policy, and permitted women to train for combat aircraft. P then 'chose combat aviation.' The Navy assigned P to the West Coast F-14 program. P began training amidst an ongoing public controversy about the appropriateness of women serving in combat roles in the military. P never initiated any contacts with the media prior to the alleged defamations. P granted an interview to KNSD-TV, a local San Diego, California station. Also, The Compass, a publication for the naval community in San Diego covered her assignment to the F-14. After eleven months of training another female aviator, Hultgreen, and P satisfied requirements for posting with a carrier-based flight squadron. They participated in regular training exercises to maintain their combat readiness. Lt. Hultgreen died while attempting to land an F-14 on the U.S.S. Lincoln. NATOPs determined that the plane did not signal to the pilot that one of its engines was not working until it was too late to avoid a crash. The media turned its attention to the question of whether the Navy had established a 'double standard' in order to enable women to qualify as combat pilots, initially focusing on Lt. Hultgreen. D who had long opposed permitting women to serve in combat positions, drew attention to P. D had testified before Congress in opposition to women in combat, published on the subject, and, in the early 1990s, served on the Presidential Commission on Assignment of Women in the Armed Services. D incorporated the Center for Military Readiness and served as its president; the CMR has regularly published articles and issued press releases opposing women serving in combat positions, including as combat pilots. D and CMR published four allegedly defamatory publications about P. D alerted Senator Strom Thurmond to 'certain practices designed to assure that women will not fail [that] have now been extended to the demanding and dangerous field of carrier aviation in the F-14 community.' D characterized P as an unqualified pilot. She quoted at length from a letter she had received from Lt. Patrick Jerome Burns, who had briefly been an F-14 instructor for both women. Lt. Burns cast the Navy's decision to break down a gender barrier and permit women pilots to fly combat aircraft as 'politically driven.' D republished the letter to Senator Thurmond as part of a more comprehensive CMR 'special report' on alleged double standards in naval aviation. It included excerpts from P's confidential training records, parts of which had been sent to D by Lt. Burns. It reiterated that Lt. Hultgreen and Pilot B were unqualified pilots, and noted special accommodations the Navy had made for Pilot B. D's Report was circulated to the media, online, and within the naval aviator community, including on the U.S.S. Lincoln, where P was still based. P was as the only remaining carrier-qualified woman F-14 pilot, and therefore it was well known that she was Pilot B. The media revealed P's name. A year later D restated her conclusion that D was an incompetent combat pilot in a speech at the Army-Navy Club in Washington, D.C. Twenty months later, on November 6, 1997, after P had filed suit, D repeated this conclusion in a CMR press release, referring to P by name. P filed a defamation action against D and CMR as well as the Copley Press (d/b/a The San Diego Union-Tribune), News World Communications, Inc. (d/b/a The Washington Times), and John Does 1-100 (retired officers of the Navy and other military services, who allegedly assisted Donnelly and republished her statements). P's complaint also included causes of action for libel against the two media defendants, and an invasion of privacy claim against all Ds. P sought compensatory and punitive damages of not less than $50,000 in view of the injuries proximately caused, including her removal from flight status by the Navy on May 30, 1995. P had been evaluated as an above-average pilot until the publication of Report, her instructors gave her only average marks in April and May 1995. Despite the conclusion of a Field Naval Aviation Evaluation Board that she received no preferential treatment, was a qualified pilot, and should have her flight status reinstated but be assigned to a different aircraft, she had been unable to obtain reinstatement as any type of naval aviator because of the damage done to her reputation as a fighter pilot by the false and defamatory statements of Ds. Two years later the Navy Inspector General overturned the Board's decision that P be assigned to fly in a different aircraft and also found that the failure to return her to flight status lacked substantial justification, P was never again assigned to fly a naval combat plane. As a result of being out of the field for two years, P alleged, she lost her career as a naval aviator. The district court entered summary judgment for Ds because P had become a limited-purpose public figure, albeit possibly involuntarily and had failed to meet her burden to show that Ds had published the defamatory material with actual malice. P was a public figure because of her past conduct, including taking on a role as one of the first two women combat pilots, her numerous appearances in the media before and after Lt. Hultgreen's crash, and the fact that 'she was a forerunner in the military's attempt to integrate women into combat positions.' As 'a central figure in the public controversy over the place of women in the military' and given the media coverage in which she was often 'featured prominently,' P was a limited-purpose public figure. P appealed.

Issues

Rule of Law

Holding and Decision

Legal Analysis

© 2007-2024 ABN Study Partner.