DEFAMATION -- LIBEL AND SLANDER [Florida Law - FReepers Heed]

Florida Bar Association ^

[Chancellor Palpatine]

DEFAMATION -- LIBEL AND SLANDER

The First Amendment to the Constitution provides a broad right of freedom of speech. However, if a false statement has been made about you, you may have wondered if you could sue for defamation.

Generally, defamation consists of: (1) a false statement of fact about another; (2) an unprivileged publication of that statement to a third party; (3) some degree of fault, depending on the type of case; and (4) some harm or damage. Libel is defamation by the printed word and slander is defamation by the spoken word.

If the statement is made about a public official - for example, a police officer, mayor, school superintendent - or a public figure - that is a generally prominent person or a person who is actively involved in a public controversy, then it must be proven that the statement was made with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for whether the statement was true or false. In other words, the fact that the statement was false is not enough to recover for defamation. On the other hand, if the statement was made about a private person, then it must be proven that the false statement was made without reasonable care as to whether the statement was true or false.

There are a number of defenses available in a defamation action. Of course, if a statement is true, there can be no action for defamation. Truth is a complete defense. Additionally, if the statement is an expression of an opinion as opposed to a statement of fact, there can be no action for defamation. We do not impose liability in this country for expressions of opinion. However, whether a statement will be deemed to be an expression of opinion as opposed to a statement of fact is not always an easy question to answer. For example, the mere fact that a statement is found in an editorial is not enough to qualify for the opinion privilege if the particular statement contained in the editorial is factual in nature.

There is also a privilege known as neutral reporting. For example, if a newspaper reports on newsworthy statements made about someone, the newspaper is generally protected if it makes a disinterested report of those statements. In some cases, the fact that the statements were made is newsworthy and the newspaper will not be held responsible for the truth of what is actually said.

There are other privileges as well. For example, where a person, such as a former employer, has a duty to make reports to other people and makes a report in good faith without any malicious intent, that report will be protected even though it may not be totally accurate.

Another example of a privilege is a report on a judicial proceeding. News organizations and others reporting on activities that take place in a courtroom are protected from defamation actions if they have accurately reported what took place.

If you think you have been defamed by a newspaper, magazine, radio or television station, you must make a demand for retraction before a lawsuit can be filed. If the newspaper, magazine, radio or television station publishes a retraction, you can still file suit, but your damages may be limited. Unless the media defendant acted with malice, bad faith or reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the story, you can only recover your actual damages. No punitive damages can be assessed in the absence of these elements.

An action for libel or slander must be brought within two years of the time the statements were made. If you wait beyond this two year period, any lawsuit will be barred.

Libel and slander cases are often very complicated. Before you decide to take any action in a libel or slander case, you should consult with an attorney. An attorney can help you decide whether you have a case and advise you regarding the time and expense involved in bringing this type of action.

(updated 12/01)

[TheAngryClam]

Isn't it the citizenship of the decedent?

Oh, and as a side note, Posner decided, apparently for the first time, the other day, that in an action that includes foreign nationals of the same nation of citizenship on both sides of the action (say, a UK subject on both the plaintiff and defendant side) does not violate complete diversity.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Gaaaaah! Stop it - my conflicts teacher is now in my head!

[John Beresford Tipton]

"assuming US Marshals have nothing to do than bother a bunch of political posters... give me a break."

We are not talking about Marshal Dillon who has discretion in what he does. These US Marshals are more the thin necked geek type. They serve court process, and if you lose they seize and auction off your property and pay it over to the winning side.

[kegler4]

"DemocRATs would like nothing better than take down FR and some Freepers are leading the way with their lack of responsibility in posing!"

According to my own little personal polls, most liberals, moderates, and conservatives don't even know what Free Republic is. Almost all the people I encounter in everyday life (co-workers, guys I bowl with, neighbors, etc) have never heard of it.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

There have been many lawsuits, not all were fought up through the courts. Many of the defendants just cave in. The COS have been successful in European courts, too.

Most of their claims have to do with "fair use", which Jim Robinson is familiar with.

The main cases regarding Scientology involve publication of their religious materials, which the defendants try to use in the public arena, most popularly on the internet, to prove that Scientology is a scam.

www.xenu.net can link you to many of their court cases, and fill you in on the controversy.

[Poohbah]

They could just subpoena FR's records, even get the pulled posts, I assume.

Can you imagine how bad we would Freep them for doing that??

Well, at that point, any and all communications between FReepers involved in "FReeping" (read: "attempted intimidation of court officers") become eligible for subpoena to support criminal prosecutions, and you'll get to spend 5-10 in prison.

[Old Professer]

What is most necessary to succeed in an action for libel or slander is for the plaintiff to show harm; since Schiavo's livelihood is not dependent on his personal character, Felos would be the more likely of the two to bring suit.

If you were motivated by genuine concern for members of this site by specific allegations made here that lack merit, perhaps you might wish to reference them for us?

[NeoCaveman]

Did anyone get sued for their postings about clinton?

[Chancellor Palpatine]

That actually mkes sense. On a side note, I got a really nice compliment from him on building a record in a case several years ago.

[Porterville]

The whole point of this post is to scare a bunch of gray-hairs who are unsure about the Internet, it is mean and stupid, this post holds no weight. I can't believe it is allowed to stay on the message board....

[Modernman]

So, just as a devil's advocate type of situation, suppose I, as a Maryland resident in Maryland, throw a rock in a non-criminal manner through the window of somebody's house across the border in Virginia. Which state's laws would apply?

Good question. I think, in a civil case, the subtantive law of Virginia would apply, since the damage occured in Virginia to a Virginia resident.

[John Beresford Tipton]

"Get ready to include the bible in your lawsuit as that will be my authority."

Er, hey Ex- Section 8 ring a bell??

[exmarine]

Yeah, right, what is this - a script you are writing? hahahaha. I laughed at you. Sue me.

[PhiKapMom]

Count me foolish -- I have been here since the days of when the email was listed next to my screen name! I don't have anything to hide and if I did my email and name can be found on FR on threads.

Now I am involved in a Grassroots Bush effort to use State Yahoo Bush Groups to help the campaign -- my screen name and email have showed up all over the place not to mention my real name.

I have had some nasty emails from time to time -- some virus' sent to my email account, etc. from people that don't like what I have to say!

[Catspaw]

Get ready to include the bible in your lawsuit as that will be my authority.

Well, I'm not suing you, but if you're sued, you have a right to use whatever materials you want in court.

[Old Professer]

This "freedom of speech" at all costs on here is a ridiculous argument

Baa!!!!!!

[Warren_Piece]

Next he's gonna say, "You know it would be a shame if your employer found out you were freeping at work..." Oh, damn! I just gave him another intimidation idea!

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Not that I know of. I've heard that some got to meet some secret service folks, though.

[exmarine]

The bible is what people swear on in courtrooms when they take oaths.

[mtbopfuyn]

Part of it would depend upon whether Shiavo can be deemed to have become a public figure yet by the court.

His name has been in most every newspaper across the nation, on the radio, and on tv. His picture has been in newspapers and national tv. I remember seeing the story on tv years ago. Some events are on public record. He made a statement to the public a couple days age. His attorney has discussed it in the media. IMO, he is a public figure.