Also known as: republications · republishing · republish · republished · republication of will
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
A doctrine under which execution of a codicil to a will is treated as reexecution of the will itself. The doctrine causes the will to take effect as of the codicil date for purposes such as incorporation by reference and disposition of after-acquired property.
A doctrine under which execution of a codicil to a will is treated as reexecution of the will itself. The doctrine causes the will to take effect as of the codicil date for purposes such as incorporation by reference and disposition of after-acquired property.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The repetition or wider dissemination of a defamatory statement. A person who publishes a defamatory statement remains liable for additional harm caused by a third party's repetition when the original speaker authorized or intended the repetition.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The repetition or wider dissemination of a defamatory statement. A person who publishes a defamatory statement remains liable for additional harm caused by a third party's repetition when the original speaker authorized or intended the repetition.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
A codicil republishes an earlier will only when the codicil shows an intent to revive or reexecute the will. The doctrine treats the will as executed on the codicil date for purposes such as incorporation by reference, but revival requires evidence of the testator's intent.
Supporting sources
Ravi Reddy, a compliance officer at Redwood Bank, told loan officers that former employee Roberto Reyes had laundered cartel funds. Reddy then uploaded the slides to an industry folder and urged other banks to circulate them. Several banks reposted the slides in their risk bulletins, causing Reyes additional lost job opportunities. Reddy is liable for the harm from those republications because he authorized and intended the repetition.
Senator Rhea Reynolds delivered remarks on the Senate floor accusing a contractor of fraud. She later included the identical remarks in a press release sent to newspapers and posted on her website. The contractor sued for defamation based on the press release. The republication falls outside speech-or-debate protection and exposes Reynolds to liability.
Senator Regina Robinson read classified documents into the congressional record. She then arranged for a publishing house to print and sell the full text as a book. A grand jury sought testimony about the book arrangement. The republication through commercial distribution receives no speech-or-debate immunity.
A radio station received a tape of an illegally intercepted cell-phone conversation and broadcast it. The station had not participated in the interception but knew the tape had been obtained unlawfully. The subject sued the station for defamation based on the broadcast. The republication is actionable because the station knowingly disseminated the defamatory content.
An original defamer is liable for additional harm from a third party's repetition when the original speaker authorized or intended the repetition. Liability also arises when the repetition was reasonably to be expected under the circumstances.
Supporting sources
The single-publication rule treats one edition of a mass communication as a single publication even when the identical content appears in different but coordinated formats. When the releases are staggered in time or reach materially different audiences, courts may treat them as separate publications.
Supporting sources
Speech-or-debate immunity protects statements made in Congress but does not extend to republication outside the legislative chamber. A member who repeats the remarks in a press release, book, or other public medium may be held liable for defamation.
Supporting sources
…from that long-established rule. Mr. Justice Story in his Commentaries, for example, explained that there was no immunity for republication of a speech first delivered in Congress: “Therefore, although a speech delivered in the house of commons is privileged, and the member cannot be questioned respecting it elsewhere; yet,…