## Facts

- In October 2006, law enforcement conducted a nationwide fugitive round-up. In Nashville, the U.S. Marshals Service partnered with the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (Metro) to arrest individuals wanted on felony warrants.
- Metro clerks compiled outstanding warrants and entered suspects’ names and identifying information into a spreadsheet for use during the operation.
- One warrant was for “Paula Milligan a.k.a. Paula Rebecca Staps,” a North Carolina resident in her twenties with identifying information that did not match Paula Ann Milligan, a 42-year-old Tennessee resident.
- A Metro clerk, using Metro’s database, mistakenly auto-filled Paula Ann Milligan’s identifying information into the spreadsheet entry for the North Carolina suspect, linking the warrant to the wrong person.
- On October 24, 2006, officers went to Paula Ann Milligan’s home to execute the warrant. Before doing so, an officer called a warrant clerk to confirm the warrant was still active; the clerk confirmed it without physically reviewing the warrant, which would have revealed mismatched identifying details.
- Officers arrested Paula Ann Milligan. About a week later, the charges against her were dropped, and the case was dismissed on November 6, 2006.
- WZTV–Fox 17 (Fox), a Nashville television station operated by Sinclair Television of Nashville, Inc. (Sinclair), was invited to accompany officers and report on the operation; Fox recorded Milligan’s arrest.
- On November 2, 2006, Fox aired a segment stating that officers arrived “with warrants in hand” and that “[t]heir first arrest came early—Paula Milligan, wanted on four counts of forgery and one count of identity theft,” while showing approximately seven seconds of video of Milligan being led to a police car.
- Milligan sued Sinclair for defamation (and related reputational tort claims based on the same broadcast). Sinclair moved for summary judgment, invoking Tennessee’s fair-report privilege.
- Milligan argued the privilege did not apply because the broadcast was not a fair and accurate report of an official action, including by implying officers had a warrant physically present. The district court granted summary judgment to Sinclair, and Milligan appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Fox 17’s segment was a report of an “official action” covered by Tennessee’s fair-report privilege.
2. Whether the segment was “fair and accurate” (or a fair abridgment) of the official action, despite the mistaken-identity arrest and the statement that officers had “warrants in hand.”
3. If the fair-report privilege applied, whether Milligan produced evidence of actual malice sufficient to defeat the privilege and avoid summary judgment.

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Sinclair.
- The court held Tennessee’s fair-report privilege applied because the broadcast reported an official law-enforcement action (the execution of a warrant and arrest during the roundup).
- The court concluded the broadcast was sufficiently fair and accurate in substance; any claimed literal inaccuracy (such as “warrants in hand”) did not remove the report from the privilege.
- The court held Milligan failed to show a genuine dispute of material fact that Sinclair acted with actual malice, so the privilege barred liability.

## Legal Principles

- Tennessee recognizes a qualified fair-report privilege protecting publications that fairly and accurately report official actions or official proceedings.
- An arrest made by law enforcement while executing a warrant can constitute an official action for purposes of the privilege.
- The privilege is not defeated by every minor inaccuracy; the question is whether the publication is substantially accurate or a fair abridgment in substance.
- When the fair-report privilege applies under Tennessee law, the plaintiff must show actual malice—knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth—to overcome the privilege.
- Reliance on official activity and information, absent evidence the publisher seriously doubted its truth, generally does not support an actual-malice finding at the summary-judgment stage.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Sinclair, holding that Fox 17’s report on Milligan’s arrest during a joint Marshals–Metro fugitive roundup fell within Tennessee’s fair-report privilege as a substantially accurate account of an official law-enforcement action, and that Milligan failed to raise a triable issue that the station acted with actual malice.


Milligan v. Sinclair Television of Nashville, Inc., 670 F.3d 686 (2012)