midterm - libel

Elements of a Libel Suit

• defamation

• identification

• publication

• falsity

• injury

• fault

defamation

a communication is defamatory if it

• tends to harm the reputation of another as to

• lower them in the estimation of the community, or

• deter third persons from associating or dealing w/ them

• for a statement to be defamatory, it must be one that a reasonable person might understand as stating actual facts about the plaintiff

• generalized insult or unflattering statements may not be defamatory even if false

• falsity doesn’t make a statement defamatory. the statement must injsure reputation to  be actionable 

• truth doesn’t take away the sing of defamatory statement. But a statement this is true isn’t actionable as libel 

defamation - roles of judge and jury

• the judge determines whether the statements are capable of a defamatory meaning - a question of law

• the jury decided whether the statements were understood as defamatory - a question of fact 

*statements will be interpreted in their ordinary and natural sense. Courts will consider the context in which they appear 

Defamation per se 

• words are defamatory on their face

• examples could imply criminal conduct, professional incompetence, sexual immorality, loathsome diseases 

defamation per quod

• a facially innocent statement becomes defamatory when it’s combine with unstated facts known to the audience

• if statements are defamatory per quod, the plaintiff must prove special damages

Scotty Pippen’s case ⭐️

• Pippen sued NBC and other media for a false story about his filing of bankruptcy

• the question the opinion deals with most extensively is whether the falsehood is defamatory per se or per quod, and if the latter, whether special damages can be proved

Yonaty v. Mincolla

• mf was called gay

• another question of whether statements are per se or per quod 

• case also demonstrates that wha't’s defamatory can change over time 

defamation by implication

• though every fact in a publication may be true, the arrangement of the facts or the omission of some facts creates a false and defamatory impression

• public officials and public figures mist prove publisher knew or had a high degree of awareness of the false implication

• private individuals must only prove negligence