![]() ![]() Damage to reputation? Do others believe the false allegations? Has this false claim caused you to lose income/business, lose friends, or suffer actual damages? Have you lost liberty, been arrested, had to hire an attorney to fight charges? How many people are aware of the false accusation and believe it? What are the damages you have suffered - can you make a list of them. There are times when defamation is not actionable, or qualifies for a privilege in the law, such as statements made in open court, etc.Ī couple key questions any lawyer will consider when asked to file a lawsuit on someone's behalf: (1) what actual - provable with evidence - damages has the plaintiff suffered because of the wrong (2) who is liable and why? Defamation must be false and published (transmitted to persons other than the victim of the false accusation). Libel is written or printed defamation, while slander is verbal defamation. Whether or not a valid case exists, is a different story. But I think that, on this point, the recommendation is clearly correct.As defense lawyers say, anyone can walk down to the courthouse, pay the filing fee, and file a lawsuit, against anyone, for anything. The District Court didn't expressly discuss the Magistrate Judge's recommendations on this, and went along with the Magistrate Judge's recommendation on some issues but not all of them, so in principle the matter might still be open. ![]() Peschmann's defamation claim against Quayle based upon his "sex with the devil" statement should be dismissed. As such, the statement is not capable of a defamatory meaning. Here, Peschmann herself acknowledges that Quayle's statement is "impossible to be true," "preposterous," "ludicrous," and "outrageous." In other words, Peschmann recognizes that this statement was pure hyperbole and not an assertion that a reasonable person could take literally. Similarly protected are those statements which "could not reasonably have been interpreted as stating actual facts about the" individual, and statements of opinion unless they imply "undisclosed defamatory facts justifying the opinion." The Third Circuit has held that "the law of defamation does not extend to mere insult" and that there is "a distinction between actionable defamation and mere obscenities, insults, and other verbal abuse." And the Constitution actually protects such words. ![]() Statements which cannot be proven true or false, such as insults and name-calling, even if offensive, are not capable of a defamatory meaning. ![]() Here, however, Quayle argues, and the Court agrees, that his statement was pure hyperbole or an epithet, such that it was not provable and thus not defamatory. Finally, a false claim made to and subsequently published by a local newspaper that a high school band director had sexually harassed students stated a claim for defamation because it alleged serious sexual misconduct. Asserting to others that a plaintiff had committed "adulterous sexual conduct," was "a slut," "the queen of sluts," and a "whore" also was found to capable of a defamatory meaning and, therefore, stated a claim of per se defamation. Likewise, a public statement that a plaintiff was "an attacker," thereby "forever labeling him in print as a violent sexual deviant" was also found to be sufficient to state a claim for per se defamation. A statement that a plaintiff "ran young girls for him down at spring training, ages 12 to 14 … so that's statutory rape every time you do that" was capable of a defamatory meaning. For example, a claim that a college professor "falsely and maliciously stated to employees and other third parties that she had been sexually assaulted and harassed by, when in fact, she had not" imputed serious sexual misconduct and stated a claim for defamation per se. Ĭourts, for certain, have found false allegations of serious sexual conduct to be capable of defamatory meaning. Peschmann attempts to state a defamation claim against Quayle, arguing that his comment that she had sexual relations with the devil imputes serious sexual misconduct to her and therefore constitutes defamation per se. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |