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)

[honeygrl]

"I, on the other hand, need to go find someone to liquor. "

Well, if you feel like driving an hour.. the hubby is away for the weekend /ObviousJokeNotMeantToCausePeopleToCallMeABimboAgain

[Cultural Jihad]

One can always count on general_re to cut to the chase.

[Axenolith]

Ahhh, the Laz :) C'mon, fess up. You were Lasagnacide on &TOTSE back in the mid 90's right? ;)

[GeronL]

Yes, but they could lose the bondo-covered 1978 Camero that's still sitting up on blocks in their front yard.

%%$$^%& @^&% $()* &*&^%!!!

[FITZ]

Well --- I kind of like that link you gave me:

"Once the patient is out of immediate danger, although still in coma or vegetative state, the medical care team will concentrate on preventing infections and maintaining the patient's physical state as much as possible.
Such maintenance includes preventing pneumonia and bed sores and providing balanced nutrition. Physical therapy may also be used to prevent contractures (permanent muscular contractions) and orthopedic deformities that would limit recovery for the patients who emerge from coma."

According to the source you gave me --- if Terri is "vegetative", she should be provided a balanced nutrition??? Kind of goes against what her so-called husband intends.

Still --- "vegetative" is not a proper description because vegetables and plants don't have brain stem activity nor a sleep-wake cycle. Plants don't laugh, grimace, or cry.

[FITZ]

Also from that same link: "Some patients may regain a degree of awareness after vegetative state." Seems even more wrong to kill her ---- she apparently has a degree of awareness already, according to her family.

[TheAngryClam]

You're right, plants don't.

However, people in a persistent vegetative state like Terri do- the doctor who first came up with the term wanted to differentiate such people from those in a coma.

However, I doubt you like the word regardless of its applicability. Do you also prefer to call retarded children "special" or use other such euphemisms?

[Cultural Jihad]

Regardless, people have inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[general_re]

I've never liked this kind of thing, this business of taking little potshots at others. I very much prefer for people to just lay their cards on the table, especially when you have about 99% of the forum left in the dark, with no idea about what the hell's going on. Everybody else is left running on rumor and speculation and guesswork about what the latest inscrutable post from one person to another can possibly mean, and it's kind of grating on me tonight. It's like the good old Cold War days of entrail-reading, crystal-ball-gazing Sovietology, where you try to guess about what's going on behind the scenes based on who's standing next to the Maximum Leader at the annual May Day parade. It's just plain ridiculous - if there's something that needs saying, say it, and if not, drop it. And I don't think I'm alone in thinking this way.

[FITZ]

"Vegetative" refers to plant life. Plants are different than humans in many many ways. All kids are "special" so no ---- I wouldn't really like that euphemism. I'm not sure what I would call them. I don't like "retarded" either because that means slow or delayed and it's not really the right word to describe their difference.

[tpaine]

honeygrl wrote:

You know.. I really don't know you at all, but I looked up that WFTD thread you referenced. You appeared to be the disruptor in that thread.

Would you post a link so we could all judge for ourselves? I thought it was pulled, along with most of the threads regarding that flap..

Even with deleted comments and the fact that CP/OPH/whoever he is isn't my favorite person right now, you really came out looking like the stalker with his feelings hurt.

"Deleted posts" is the key word, kiddo..
-- I'm here, -- OPHie had to go fishin; - thats the real bottom line.

(that wasn't really a good thread to point out and use in your defense)

[Its probably the only one remaining, hon...]

- And I can't find it.

[TheAngryClam]

Not really.

What right to life does an executed man have? Or what about a drowning man? Will the ocean hear his cries that he has a right to live?

Liberty is never an inborn right- it always comes with a price, usually a big one. The Founders knew that.

And the right to "pursue happiness" is really empty anyway- you can pursue happiness at any time, under any circumstances- it doesn't mean that you'll catch it.

Most of this cribbed from Heinlein, but very much true.

[honeygrl]

I found it...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/748567/posts

[honeygrl]

And I think this one is the other one you referenced (i haven't looked through it though)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/731143/posts

[Sam Spade]

Amazing how every possible mention of OPH has been nuked from the site to make it almost appear like he was never here. Very strange indeed.

[Kryptonite]

Thanks. That clears it up for me.

[honeygrl]

Well, yeah all his posts are gone.. but you can find some of them in quotes replying to him.

[aristeides]

I recently got a DVD of the movie made of Nineteen Eighty-Four in 1984 (Burton's last role). It's a very good movie. Or doubleplusgood, I guess I should say.

[Cultural Jihad]

I was countering the Nazi claim that the Untermenschen should be killed, in an act of "mercy" of course, for who would want to laugh and cry as a retarded individual? 'Tis better to just smother these "useless eaters" so that the Ubermenschen, the Supermen, are not encumbered with their subhuman presence, eh?

[Central Scrutiniser]

Its a big old goofy world, glad I don't have to paint it....