67 F.3d 816 (9th Cir. 1996)
Appellant apple growers sought review of a decision, which granted summary judgment in favor of appellee television show and broadcasting companies in appellants' action against appellees for product disparagement. Appellees had produced and aired a news magazine segment on a chemical used on apples alleged to cause cancer. The sale of apples and apple products significantly decreased after the show aired.
- The court affirmed the decision, holding that appellants failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to the falsity of the broadcast.
- The court found that appellants offered evidence showing that no studies had been conducted to test the relationship between ingestion of the chemical and incidence of cancer in humans.
- Such evidence, however, was insufficient to show a genuine issue for trial regarding the broadcast's assertions that the chemical was a potent carcinogen.
The court affirmed the decision granting summary judgment in favor of appellee television show and broadcasting companies in appellant apple growers' action against appellees for product disparagement because appellants failed to show evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to the falsity of the broadcast in question.
Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law