Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DEFAMATION -- LIBEL AND SLANDER [Florida Law - FReepers Heed]
Florida Bar Association ^

Posted on 10/24/2003 10:14:40 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine

Edited on 10/24/2003 12:02:17 PM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]

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)


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: catholiclist; michaeldobbs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440 ... 1,761-1,774 next last
To: dead
"Does that become before or after they accuse of being a Nazi? "

And can I get sued for calling him a Nazi?
401 posted on 10/24/2003 12:54:12 PM PDT by honeygrl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies]

To: onyx
I'm not sure what "know" is supposed to mean but it's a free country so believe what you want.

402 posted on 10/24/2003 12:54:15 PM PDT by Bikers4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 389 | View Replies]

To: Warren_Piece
LOL! You're right.
403 posted on 10/24/2003 12:54:37 PM PDT by ladtx ( "Remember your regiment and follow your officers." Captain Charles May, 2d Dragoons, 9 May 1846)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
ROTFLMAO
404 posted on 10/24/2003 12:55:20 PM PDT by NeoCaveman (Official Scheming Diabolical Minion of the Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Ya think we're "published" yet? :)
405 posted on 10/24/2003 12:55:27 PM PDT by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; Chancellor Palpatine
I'm curious, Jim, if by moderating the boards you're an 'active publisher' (ie. a newspaper) as opposed to a 'passive publisher' (ie. an ISP), and thus more likely to be held responsible (for things that are libelous but for one reason or another are not removed)?
406 posted on 10/24/2003 12:55:33 PM PDT by IncPen (A young man, from a small town, with a very large imagination...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
...and besides being rude, you are?
407 posted on 10/24/2003 12:55:33 PM PDT by harrowup (So perfect I'm naturally humble)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
Well, if you would like to defend the secular humanist position insofar as it is compatible with freedom, I would be glad to take your position apart for your - piece by humanist piece.
408 posted on 10/24/2003 12:56:02 PM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 390 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
Well, there are the death threats and threats to kidnap Terri.

And those threats have been promptly removed by the moderators when they are brough to the moderators' attention.

409 posted on 10/24/2003 12:56:35 PM PDT by dirtboy (Now in theaters - Howard Dean as Buzz Lightweight - taking the Dems to Oblivion and Beyond in 2004!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]

To: Warren_Piece
I know. But I think the rest of us should know if he's done such a thing.

The paranoid "shoot the messenger" theme is amusing.

All Felos and the rest of the Schiavo legal team has to do to gather information on posters on FR is read the Terri threads simply by lurking. Ditto for the Schindler's legal team--as well as the Florida legislature and Governor's office.

If this was a private forum, I might indulge your paranoia. Right now, you're just being silly.

410 posted on 10/24/2003 12:57:23 PM PDT by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 391 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident
I don't really pay attention to the Kobe threads that much. But, Schiavo now has the ACLU on his side, and he and Felos are on a roll. I truly wouldn't put it past them.

Not to mention, if the big Democratic forces in Florida stand behind them and offer them all the assistance they need, we could see FR, or at the very least, Freeper's silenced. And, if that happens, we may realize too late that Bennett and Rush were just the beginning.
411 posted on 10/24/2003 12:57:25 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (You may forget the one with whom you have laughed, but never the one with whom you have wept.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
This same attention to detail has brought you to your flawed conclusions in the Schiavo case.

Ouch.

412 posted on 10/24/2003 12:57:33 PM PDT by Poohbah ("Would you mind not shooting at the thermonuclear weapons?" -- Major Vic Deakins, USAF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 358 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
"possible conflicts of interest in the case"

He's refused to state if he has a life insurance policy on her and he stands to acquire any money left from the lawsuits he supposedly filed on her beahlf and won.

There's nothing "possible" about it. He stands to benefit financially from her death in a number of ways. I'm betting he's already looking into book and movie of the week deals over his fight in the courts. No doubt he will be portrayed in the most noble of light.
413 posted on 10/24/2003 12:58:21 PM PDT by Bikers4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 396 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
And those threats have been promptly removed by the moderators when they are brough to the moderators' attention.

yes, they were, and I give all the credit to the mods who have to do that thankless job.

414 posted on 10/24/2003 12:58:49 PM PDT by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies]

To: ckca
It doesn't say that oph claimed to do legal work for Jimrob.
415 posted on 10/24/2003 12:59:13 PM PDT by Poohbah ("Would you mind not shooting at the thermonuclear weapons?" -- Major Vic Deakins, USAF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: harrowup
He hasn't cited a single personal lawsuit for defamation based on an Internet posting, either. Nor has he answered to my posting of the dismissed case from a large corporation.

Now that you have called him a blowhard, it is up to him to prove he is not a blowhard in his eventual Internet lawsuit. I want to sell the t-shirts outside the courtroom as we go through THAT discovery.
416 posted on 10/24/2003 1:00:04 PM PDT by HighWheeler (def.- Democrats: n. from Greek; “democ” - many; “rats” - ugly, filthy, bloodsucking parasites.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Well, if you would like to defend the secular humanist position insofar as it is compatible with freedom, I would be glad to take your position apart for your - piece by humanist piece.

Aw, I know you can do it without me, thanks a lot for the offer.

417 posted on 10/24/2003 1:00:04 PM PDT by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
The pulled threads can be requested, too.
418 posted on 10/24/2003 1:00:15 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (You may forget the one with whom you have laughed, but never the one with whom you have wept.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies]

To: Mudboy Slim
>>>How come?!

My post 309

419 posted on 10/24/2003 1:00:16 PM PDT by Calpernia (Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
I'm not sure what "know" is supposed to mean.....

And I ain't telling --- I'll have to be subpeonaed.

420 posted on 10/24/2003 1:01:40 PM PDT by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440 ... 1,761-1,774 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson