Underwager

Underwager v. Channel 9 Australia

Good Law
69 F.3d 361·1995 WL 634865
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 31, 1995No. 94-55227California3,283 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Ralph Underwager appeals the district court’s dismissal of his defamation claims against Charles Vaughn and James Peters, Sr., for lack of personal jurisdiction and against Kim Oates on summary judgment (on the merits) arising from Oates’s showing of a videotape in which Vaughn and Peters criticize Underwager’s qualifications and performance as an expert witness on child sexual abuse. 1 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

BACKGROUND

Underwager is a Minnesota psychologist who has testified as an expert witness in more than 250 trials on the subject of the unreliability of children’s testimony alleging *364 sexual abuse. On August 5, 1990, the television program Sixty Minutes Australia broadcast a documentary, “Witness for Mr. Bubbles,” in which American attorneys and psychologists disputed Underwager’s theories and credentials. The segment was primarily concerned with Underwager’s testimony for the defense in Crown v. Deren, the so-called “Mr. Bubbles” case, in which an Australian defendant was acquitted of charges that he had sexually assaulted his wife’s nursery school students in bubble baths.

Among those who appeared on the program were Peters, at the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.