WASHINGTON, Nov. 3, 2003


(CBS/AP) The Supreme Court refused Monday to block a lawsuit over a magazine's critical  safety reports about the Suzuki Samurai, a defeat for news organizations that wanted the court to clarify protections for journalists whowarn about dangers from products.

 The Suzuki case involves a lawsuit against the publisher of Consumer Reports magazine. The magazine had labeled the Samurai unacceptable in 1988 because of potential rollovers.

Consumers Union, which reports on the safetyof products ranging from child safety seats to lawn mowers, argued that a lower court ruling in its case will silence journalists who have information about dangerous products but fearcostly lawsuits.

Suzuki Motor Corp. says the magazine set out to discredit the inexpensive sport utility vehicles, known affectionately by some owners as "little mud bugs," to make headlines and money.

A divided panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that Suzuki should have a chance to argue to a jury that the magazine rigged the testing of the vehicle and acted maliciously to damage Suzuki's reputation.

The Supreme Court refused to review that decision.

The case asked whether judges should independently review evidence in libel cases before trial, stopping expensive proceedings if there is insufficient proof that a false
statement was made with actual malice.

News groups including The Associated Press had urged the court to review the case, arguing that the public has been protected over the years by reports on the dangers of smoking and fast food, among others.

Without court intervention, "virtually any product evaluation is at risk and this valuable journalistic genre is seriously compromised," the groups told the court in a filing.

The Samurai was first sold in the United States in the mid-1980s but sales plunged after the 1988 magazine report and other news accounts of possible dangers. The 1995 model was its last.

Carter Phillips, the Washington attorney representing the carmaker, said that Consumer Reports employees designed their road tests to get the Samurai to tip, and cheered when the vehicle did so. He said the magane then used its reports to make money, in fund raising and subscription drives. Suzuki did not sue after the original report, but it did claim "product disparagement" in a 1996 lawsuit in California.

Jim Guest, president of Consumers Union, said the Supreme Court did not address the merits of the case. "But we believe it hurts consumers to let the 9th Circuit ruling stand with its chilling effect on those who report about safety and health," he said.

"This is likely going to encourage libel lawsuits against news organizations across the country and the question is whether it is in turn going to discourage aggressive reporting by journalist and consumer advocates," said CBS News legal analyst
Andrew Cohen.


+++++++++++++++++

Go ZUKE!

 I  AGREE..............MAKE THEM RESPONSABLE FOR THERE POOR JOURNALISM....I'M SO TIRED OF HEARING YOUR GONNA ROLL THAT THING....  IF YOUR DUMB ENOUGH YOU CAN ROLL ANY VEHICLE   I'VE HAD BOTH A SAMMY AND SIDEKICK AND I DRIVE THEM HARD THROUGH THE CORNERS AS ANY OTHER VEHICLE AND HAVE NEVER EVEN STARTED TO TIP OR FEEL AS IF I WAS GONNA ROLL OVER.....SO HOW THEY FIGURE THERE POOR JOURALISM IS BEYOND ME  

Actually its easy to figure.  One, they assumed zuke was a bit player and would not fight the piss poor reporting.  Two, they need cash in a major way to fund the new research center they bought.  What better way than to sensationalize a product and provoke fear in the hearts of their readers.
I saw the videos.......and its clearly heard all the damming evidence on there.

I hope zuki wins this one.

Don't get me started about BIG BROTHER thinking that the commonperson has no commonsence and everything that happens must be somebodyelses fault.
The sammi wasn't designed to be a vette but a low cost, fun 4x4.  Even an F-1 with a pro-driver can flip and I have to pay more $ on Ins for the fruad that CRM pulled so I can't afford full coverge.
         Last time I checked, my big brother was a bullie till I got back at him. Yatta Yatta Yatta We all know the story. Ill get off my BIG BROTHER (help protect me from you, I mean myself) soap box.

what i could never understand is that CR has managed to also flip the Ford Explorer and Jeep Wranglers too, but some how those never got the press that the Sammy got.  guess Jeep and Ford convinced$$$$ CR to be a little less vocal about that.

oddly enough i was glancing through my CR 2003 buyers guide and saw that both the Samurai and Sidekick/Tracker got exceptional ratings and the kick/Tracker are on it list of great used cars.

I loved when i owned my Samurai how many people had "my sisters friends uncles cousins buddy rolled his Samurai" type story for me.  and i'd look at them, roll my eyes and say, they only roll if you drive them like a a$$hole, they obvioulsy don't know how to drive a 4x4, and probably had it coming.  

Yup, I agree.  What is sad however is the number of people who won't even go buy toilet paper until they see what CR has to say about it.

I hope zuke wins.  CR needs its comeuppance in a major way.

I would like someone to ask a Sami owner, who is not a blithering idiot,  what they think of  the vehicle! Ask me in court I'll testify I purchased my first, brand new, in '86. Put tons of miles on it, loved everything about it, never had any trouble with it and now I can't get a brand new one to replace it.    As others have said many times "you can roll anything".  I hope Zuk wins this thing, I'm sick of reporters molding the way we live  

FWIW,

Within the first year of owning my new 1994 Samurai, I rolled it.

I was doing about 30-35 mph, hit wet leaves and spun around backwards.  Truck slid off to the shoulder (at this time it was doing maybe 20), hit the dirt on the shoulder, and over it went.

Mind you, this was a 1994 with the more road compliant suspension

I am not an a$$hole driver, nor am I an idiot who doesn't know how to drive a 4x4.  In fact, I was once the guy who said, "CR is full of crap".

I still think they are full of crap.  But anyone who says the Sammy, or any SWB 4x4, is not more prone to a roll over than a standard car is full of crap also.  In facrt, I think it's an unsafe comment to share with the public.  Any SWB 4x4 is prone to roll over IMHO.

I'm just being the voice of dissent on a post claiming some great road manner of Zooks.  Sammys do roll over, allbeit not as easy as CR claimed.

I get people asking me the same thing all the time..."Aren't those prone to rolling?"  And I say, yeah, when you try to drive em like a race car...otherwise no, it's one of the best vehicles I have ever driven.

The lawyer taking care of this case for Suzuki even drives his own Samurai to work everyday, lol...how cool is that.  I saw this news on some channel from Buffalo when they were reporting on the case.

I too hope Suzuki wins this case.

The plain and simple facts are:

If you drive like a clown, IT WILL ROLL.  ALL 4x4s ROLL!!!!  I've almost flipped a 2x4 Freightliner truck because I floored the gas when making a left turn from a standing stop.

Well, one thing missing in these posts is reference to the voice that clearly states, on the video, "if you can't get this car to roll, I'll find someone who will."

To me, this says it all.  CR had a pre determined result that they wanted to put in their rag and by golly, they drove and drove and drove until the little zuke nearly rolled.  Hell, I can do that in my Vitara with a much longer wheelbase, coils springs and lumpy Cooper tires.

Just tell me what result you want and I can provide.  Simple as that.  Same thing CR did and got a lot of publicity for.

Still, its nice to see that they rated GASP beer once.  Even though I hate Strohs with a passion, at least they went beyond toasters and washing machines.

It is improper to make false, disparaging comments about someone else's title to property. If you state or imply that someone does not really own some piece of property, when they in fact own it, you may be libel if the owner is then unable to sell the property at the desired price because of your statements.

Be careful, not only in your advertising and marketing activities, but also with letters and in conversations, that you do not make false, disparaging statements about your competitors. Be particularly careful if you publish any statement about a competitor's products or services, or a competitor's creditworthiness or other important matter of character.

Also remember that the requirement of "publication" does not necessarily mean distribution of a magazine, newspaper or television broadcast. For the purposes of a defamation claim, publication means that you have made a statement about someone else , either in writing, orally or by electronic media, that is received by at least one other person.



Suzuki will win this one hands down!