Replies

The Publications constitute defamation (i.e. libel and/or slander per se) based upon Civil Code Sections 45 and 46 (as well as other statutory and judicial authority): Libel. The California Legislature has defined libel as a "false and unprivileged publication by writing, printing, picture, effigy, or other fixed representation to the eye, which exposes any person to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy, or which causes him to be shunned or avoided, or which has a tendency to injure him in his occupation." (Cal. Civ. Code § 45.) Slander. The California Legislature has defined slander as "a false and unprivileged publication, orally uttered, and also communications by radio or any mechanical or other means which: (1) Charges any person with crime, or with having been indicted, convicted, or punished for crime; … (3) Tends directly to injure him in respect to his office, profession, trade or business, either by imputing to him general disqualification in those respects which the office or other occupation peculiarly requires, or by imputing something with reference to his office, profession, trade, or business that has a natural tendency to lessen its profits." (Cal. Civ. Code § 46.) E. AMOUNT OF CLAIM: Claimant seeks general damages for loss of reputation, shame and mortification. Claimant seeks special damages with respect to damages it has suffered to its business, trade, profession or occupation. Finally, claimant requests exemplary damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing the responsible public employees/agents for making the defamatory Publications with actual malice. Claimant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that the public employees/agents possessed a state of mind arising from the ill will toward the claimant, and did not have a good faith belief in the truth of the defamatory Publications. Accordingly, the acts of public employees were made with actual malice, and were fraudulent and justify the imposition of punitive damages.

Interesting. I bookmarked the thread. Someone brought something to my attention last year,regarding what my ex said to fellow employees at Northrop Grumman when we got divorced. It was a pretty disgusting piece of projection. I don't even want my kids to attend the company picnics because of this.