Gomba v. McLaughlin¶
Supreme Court of Colorado. (1972). Gomba v. McLaughlin.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- Substantial truth
- A detail may be literally wrong yet leave the defamatory impression materially the same; an alteration that changes the accusation can fail the test even if much of the text is accurate.
This sourceFull court opinion inspected in reproduction. The Brighton assault evidence was disputed and the case was remanded.
- A detail may be literally wrong yet leave the defamatory impression materially the same; an alteration that changes the accusation can fail the test even if much of the text is accurate.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. The single citation of this work carries no recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:4b0bb7c469b3 · see in the full table