## Facts

- NorVergence, Inc. collapsed in 2004, leading to bankruptcy proceedings and related public controversy.
- In 2006, the Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee filed an adversary complaint against Thomas J. Salzano, alleging he misappropriated NorVergence funds for personal benefit; the allegations had not been adjudicated when reported.
- North Jersey Media Group, Inc. published a newspaper article describing the trustee’s allegations; variations of the story were republished by other outlets.
- The publications used formulations such as Salzano “allegedly stole” close to $500,000, and some headlines/subheadings used terms like “stealing” or “stolen funds.”
- The article also stated Salzano and his father started a business (“Charity Snack”) that “went belly-up.”
- Salzano, who was not a NorVergence employee, sued for defamation, claiming the reports stated theft as fact and unfairly tied him to the NorVergence scandal.

## Issues

1. Whether the common-law fair-report privilege applies to reports of allegations contained in an initial civil complaint filed in court before any judicial action on the pleading.
2. Whether the specific articles and headlines were sufficiently fair and accurate, including whether wording and contextual additions exceeded the complaint and conveyed allegations as proven facts.

## Decision

- The court rejected an “initial pleadings” exception and held the fair-report privilege extends to fair and accurate reports of first-filed complaints in judicial proceedings.
- The court held the privilege is conditional; it protects only reports that are accurate and complete or a fair abridgement, and that present the charges as allegations from an official filing.
- The court determined dismissal at the pleadings stage was improper because fact questions remained about whether the publications’ language (including “stole/stolen”) and the “Charity Snack” reference were fair and accurate within the privilege.
- The court reversed the Appellate Division insofar as it adopted an initial-pleadings exception and remanded for further proceedings on privilege application and the defamation claims.

## Legal Principles

- A qualified fair-report privilege protects publication of defamatory matter in a report of an official action or proceeding when the report is accurate and complete or a fair abridgement.
- Filing a civil complaint commences an official judicial proceeding for fair-report purposes; public access generally begins at filing, so reports of initial pleadings can be privileged.
- The privilege requires substantial accuracy measured by the “gist” or “sting” of the official record; minor inaccuracies do not defeat it if the overall effect matches the proceeding.
- The report must attribute accusations to the official filing and must not present unproven allegations as established fact.
- The privilege does not protect material embellishment or contextual framing that materially increases the defamatory impact beyond what the official record supports; whether a report is fair and accurate is often fact-dependent.

## Conclusion

The court held that media defendants may invoke the fair-report privilege for reporting allegations in an initial complaint, but the privilege depends on fair, substantially accurate, and clearly attributed reporting; because the fairness and accuracy of the articles’ wording and added context were disputable, the case was remanded for further proceedings.


Salzano v. N. Jersey Media Grp., Inc., 201 N.J. 500, 993 A.2d 778 (N.J. 2010)