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 ... 721-740741-760761-780 ... 1,761-1,774 next last
To: Pan_Yans Wife; concerned about politics
Give him the Black's law definition of "assertion of fact".

OK.

assert To state as true; declare; maintain. (at 116)

fact A thing done; an action performed or an incident transpiring; an even or circumstance; an actual occurrence; an actual happening in time or space or an even mental or physical; that which has taken place. (at 591)

741 posted on 10/24/2003 2:47:39 PM PDT by olorin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 712 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
"What question?"

For example, stating that a judge took a bribe when you have zero knowledge that it has occurred would obviously be "bearing false witness," would it not?

742 posted on 10/24/2003 2:48:33 PM PDT by lugsoul (And I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 714 | View Replies]

To: Bob J
A site that I'm sure has the best intentions for FR in their heart.

That made me burst out laughing!

743 posted on 10/24/2003 2:48:49 PM PDT by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Don't forget to Visit/donate at http://www.georgewbush.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 730 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Ahhh...that's just what then Rep. Lindsey Graham latched onto during the impeachment hearings when all hell broke loose.
744 posted on 10/24/2003 2:48:55 PM PDT by wimpycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 732 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
I will ask you again: What is the source of right and wrong? Is it man or God? (those are your ONLY two choices)
745 posted on 10/24/2003 2:48:56 PM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 735 | View Replies]

To: olorin
LOL
746 posted on 10/24/2003 2:49:23 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 741 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
Prove me wrong

Reply to this and state: "I am the poster known as 'concerned about politics'."

747 posted on 10/24/2003 2:49:28 PM PDT by olorin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 716 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
But it remains a possibility. Nobody is immune to a libel suit simply because they're posting under a screen name.

Have you ever been to an anti-Bush site? OMG. We're saints.

748 posted on 10/24/2003 2:49:49 PM PDT by concerned about politics ( Have you donated to the Salvation Army? Liberals HATE Christian organizations! Tax deductable, too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 734 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Please look at #648 and you will see the answer!

Thanks, but that's not the question I asked.

749 posted on 10/24/2003 2:50:02 PM PDT by IncPen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 687 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Get it straight. The legal guardian wanted it done. The judge didn't decide that it should be done. He decided that someone else couldn't stop it.
750 posted on 10/24/2003 2:51:59 PM PDT by lugsoul (And I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 719 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine

751 posted on 10/24/2003 2:52:00 PM PDT by honeygrl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

But it remains a possibility. Nobody is immune to a libel suit simply because they're posting under a screen name

Excuse me for putting that in big bold lettering, but maybe some IMO hard-headed Freepers will take a hint since you are posting this information since they obviously don't believe CP!

752 posted on 10/24/2003 2:52:00 PM PDT by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Don't forget to Visit/donate at http://www.georgewbush.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 734 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
All FReepers are equal, but some FReepers are more equal than others.

You only need to have a thread sent to chat whilst breaking News overflows with News of the Royals, "Caption this Picture" and "How's My Thong", to appreciate the truth of that statement...

753 posted on 10/24/2003 2:52:46 PM PDT by IncPen (So, which of you is a Moderator?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 707 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Sorry. Can't enlighten you on what they reviewed. I just disagree that they decided based on "wild tales" and bad info. You and I don't know the answer. We have opinions. You don't like the decision. I do.
754 posted on 10/24/2003 2:53:00 PM PDT by Jrabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies]

To: habs4ever
You advocated that Michael Schiavo should be killed, twice, on one thread, and you think it's meanspirited to call you a damned fool? Suck it up and grow a pair.You are all for displaying your own private demons for all FR to read, yet can't stomach when some have the temerity to object to your gross displays of vanity and childishness.

Sorry pally, nice try. At the time, there was a chance Michael Schiavo KIDNAPPED his wife, which meant she died. In that case, I would have advocated the death penalty for him, for murder. Sorry if a brain-fart like you cannot see my meaning.

Nothing you ever write me will EVER alter my posting course. So what's the point? Just go beat up on every other freeper you see, like I see you doint all the time. You must have a really bad life, to be as angry as you are.

755 posted on 10/24/2003 2:53:41 PM PDT by Lazamataz (I am the extended middle finger in the fist of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 737 | View Replies]

To: wimpycat
Of course - but by then it was too late. The die was cast, and the American public was sick of being unable to watch the news. The Senate was tracking polls then, and knew it was over.

The moment I knew it was done was the day Rush told everybody to send kids from the room as he breathlessly read from portions of the Starr report about a particular sex act, sighing and groaning in disgust.

756 posted on 10/24/2003 2:53:48 PM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 744 | View Replies]

To: olorin
Reply to this and state: "I am the poster known as 'concerned about politics'."

If that's your opinion, yes. My opinion? Well, for now. Are you refering to the concerned about politics that was back when, or the concerned about politics as in now? Others use my FR screen name. Which concerned about politics are you refering to?

757 posted on 10/24/2003 2:54:19 PM PDT by concerned about politics ( Have you donated to the Salvation Army? Liberals HATE Christian organizations! Tax deductable, too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 747 | View Replies]

To: habs4ever; Lazamataz
Oh leave Laz alone. He's harmless.
758 posted on 10/24/2003 2:54:36 PM PDT by honeygrl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 721 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
Get it straight. The legal guardian wanted it done. The judge didn't decide that it should be done. He decided that someone else couldn't stop it.

Are you a moral relativist? i.e. do you believe morals come from man? Yes or no.

759 posted on 10/24/2003 2:54:37 PM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 750 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
You obviously don't know, because you won't even stand up and say that lying about a person is violating one of God's rules. I guess that in your mind it depends on whether the subject's politics align with yours or not.
760 posted on 10/24/2003 2:55:27 PM PDT by lugsoul (And I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 745 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 721-740741-760761-780 ... 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