1. Professor Goering
LARW I and II, Section A3
MEMORANDUM
TO: Junior Associates (A-M)
FROM: Senior Partner Goering and Senior Associate Muir
RE: Obama v. New Yorker Magazine
DATE: September 9, 2008
Michelle and Barack Obama have consulted our firm about a possible lawsuit
against New Yorker Magazine. As you may recall from the news a couple of months
ago, the New Yorker published a controversial magazine cover depicting Mr. and Mrs.
Obama. For your information, I have attached a color copy of the magazine cover. For a
CBS news story that aired on television shortly after the magazine was published, see
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/14/politics/politico/main4257077.shtml.
The New Yorker Magazine is published on Manhattan Island, New York.
However, its publisher, Conde Nast, has headquarters in both New York City and
Chicago. Because the Obamas reside in Illinois and the New Yorker is distributed on
news stands there, they would prefer to file the lawsuit in Illinois. You may assume for
our purposes that they will file in Chicago, although we still need to explore whether they
will fare better by filing in state district court or by filing a diversity action in federal
district court. Either way, please assume that the court will apply Illinois law.
As you know, by July 2008, Barack Obama was the National Democratic Party’s
presumptive nominee for President of the United States. Michelle is his wife. Both
graduated from Harvard Law School and both are experienced lawyers. Most recently,
Michelle has been a hospital executive in Chicago. Barack has practiced civil rights law
and has taught part-time at the University of Chicago. Michelle and Barack Obama are
both fine, upstanding, loyal American citizens, and neither has ever been charged with
criminal conduct of any kind. As you know, they are both Christians, and neither has ever
been affiliated with any terrorist organization. The Obamas have plenty of evidence to
prove these facts at trial, including the fact that Mr. Obama has never been a Muslim.
The Obamas want to know whether either of them can recover money damages
from the New Yorker magazine for defamation. Please research the issue. You will want
to consider not only the elements of defamation, but also whether the New Yorker can
rely on the First Amendment or any other privilege to shield it from liability from either
one of our clients. Please summarize the results of your research in a 5-7 page, double-
spaced office memorandum in 12-point Times New Roman font. Please consult your
legal writing textbook for the specific format and organization of your memo.
All of the relevant cases and other research materials you may use are attached.
PLEASE DO NOT RESEARCH ANY OTHER MATERIALS THAN THOSE I HAVE
PROVIDED TO YOU. However, you may consult a legal dictionary for definitions of
legal terms that are unfamiliar to you. You may rely on your general knowledge of the
events surrounding the ongoing political campaign for President.

2. Professor Goering
LARW I and II, Section A3
You may discuss the assignment with any of your first-year law school classmates
in this section. However, it is a violation of the Honor Code to show your written work
to anyone except me or Jared Muir, my senior associate. Please review the attached
guidelines regarding the Honor Code. If you have any questions about whether certain
conduct violates the Honor Code, you are expected to consult Jared or me for guidance.
Please consult the course syllabus for instructions on submitting your office
memo on or before September 25, 2008, at 5:00 p.m. My next interview with the
Obamas is on September 30, so I would like to review the results of your research well in
advance of that date.
Attachments:
• New Yorker Magazine Cover, July 21, 2008
• Honor Code Guidelines for Graded Memos and Briefs
Research Materials (posted on TWEN):
• Bell v. Natl. Republican Cong. Comm., 187 F. Supp. 2d 605 (S.D. W. Va. 2002).
• Celebrezze v. Dayton Newsps., Inc., 535 N.E.2d 755 (Ohio App. 8th Dist. 1988).
• Homerin v. Mid-Ill. Newsps., 614 N.E.2d 496 (Ill. App. 3d Dist. 1993).
• Hustler Mag. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988).
• Leidholdt v. L.F.P. Inc., 860 F.2d 890 (9th Cir. 1988).
• Seith v. Chi. Sun-Times, Inc., 861 N.E.2d 1117 (Ill. App. 1st Dist. 2007).
• Victoria Square, LLC v. Glastonbury Citizen, 891 A.2d 142 (Conn. Super. 2006).
• Restatement (Second) of Torts § 558 (1977).

3. Professor Goering
LARW I and II, Section A3

4. Professor Goering
LARW I and II, Section A3

5. Professor Goering
LARW I and II, Section A3
Honor Code Guidelines for Graded Memos and Briefs
Legal Analysis, Research, and Writing I and II
Q: Who is allowed to see my memo or brief?
A: You may not show your memo or brief to anyone except me and Jared Muir,
my teaching assistant.
Please understand that this requirement is indeed as limited as it sounds. You
may not show your paper to your spouse, sweetheart, best friend, mother,
significant other, or anyone else, even "just to proofread" or "just to see what she
thinks." This applies even if you've "always had so-and-so proofread all my
papers."
Q: With whom may I research and discuss my memo or brief problem?
A: You may research and discuss your memo and brief problems only with
fellow members of the A3 Section, Washburn Law School librarians, Jared
Muir, or me. Reading your memo or brief to another individual is not discussion
and is not allowed.
Please understand that this requirement is, again, as limited as it sounds. This
means you may not discuss your problem or your paper with students from other
classes or other LARW sections, with mentors, with tutors, with attorneys, with
other professors, with parents, with siblings, or with any of your friends who are
not Section A3 students.
Q: What should I do if I have a question on what is permissible and what is not?
A: Ask me in class, come see me, e-mail me, phone me, or drop a note in my
mailbox in Room 203. You must check with me before doing anything else.
Q: How long do these restrictions last for any particular assignment?
A: Until I announce in class that they are lifted.

6. Professor Goering
LARW I and II, Section A3
Q: What should I do if I know that somebody is violating these rules?
A: Under the Honor Code, you have a responsibility to come to me with names and
details, so that I can begin an investigation. I will vigorously pursue an
investigation of any
violation for which I have evidence. However, please understand that I can do
nothing with rumor or innuendo.
Q: So, is cheating a common problem?
A: No, it is not. It is rare, in my experience both as a student and a professor. Most
students who are intelligent and disciplined enough to get into law school don’t
need any rules at all, because they abide by the simple rule that it is unfair to do
anything on a graded assignment that would give them an unfair advantage
over fellow law students. But cheating has happened before, and therefore I am
spelling out the rules to assure you that anyone who breaks these rules is either
too ignorant or too unethical to belong in the legal profession.
Q: Don't these restrictions defeat some educational benefits?
A: Yes, indeed, they do. In legal practice, it is beneficial to talk about a memo or
brief problem with anyone you think may be able to help, subject to your ethical
duty to keep your client communications confidential. But law school is not
"real life." Requiring you to write a memo and a brief entirely on your own is
intended to be of great benefit to you, but that is not the only purpose. The other
purpose of graded assignments is to test your ability to apply legal research,
analysis, and writing skills you learn through reading, exercises, and class
discussion.
So, in the weeks to come, please remember:
THIS IS A TEST.