defamation case briefs

Lega Siciliana Social Club v. St. Germaine

Quick NotesDefamation tends to injure reputation, diminish the esteem, respect, goodwillto excite adverse, derogatory, or unpleasant feelings or opinions against him.

Book Name Torts Cases, Problems, And Exercises. Weaver, Third Edition. ISBN: 978-1-4224-7220-0.

Issueo Whether in granting the motion for summary judgment, the court properly concluded that the publication by the defendant

of the subject letter did not constitute libel per se? Yes, it did constitute as libel per se.

Procedure

Trialo Granted motion for summary judgment on the ground that the allegedly defamatory statement did NOT constitute libel per

se.

Appellant o Reversed and case remanded for further proceeding in accordance with law.

Facts Reason

o Pl - Lega Siciliana Social Clubo Df - St. GermaineWhat happened?o This case is a review of motion of

summary judgment.Social Clubo There was a social club close to a

residential neighborhood whose membership only extended to Sicilians or natural born Americans of Sicilian ancestry.

o They received a liquor license 5 year after the opening of the club.

Pissed Off Neighboro The granting of the liquor license

led to increased traffic and noise, which adversely affected the residents by destroying the privacy, seclusion and quiet character of their residential community.

Letter to the President of the Board of Aldermeno Detailed his dissatisfaction with the

Trial Courts Reasoningo The court further concluded that because the statements were not libelous per se, to prevail,

the plaintiff had to show "cognizable damage or harm" to its reputation to survive a motion for summary judgment.

o Court concluded that the plaintiff had shown no "cognizable damage or harm" as a consequence of the defendant's allegedly libelous statements.

Defamationo Is comprised of the torts of libel and slander.o Tends to injure reputation, diminish the esteem, respect, goodwill

the plaintiff is held, or to excite adverse, derogatory, or unpleasant feelings or opinions against him.

Slandero Slander is oral defamation. Libel (which we are concerned with in the present case)o Libel is written defamation Libel per quodo A libel per quod is not libelous on the face of the communication, but becomes libelous in

light of extrinsic facts known by the recipiento When a plaintiff brings an action in libel per quod, he must plead and prove actual damages

increased traffic and noise that he believed stemmed from club activities and the granting of the liquor license.

o Elderly members with political connections in both state and local.

o Mafia connections to rubber stamp whatever they want.

o Fear of having someone setting our house on fire..

Trial Courto Granted motion for summary

judgment on the ground that the allegedly defamatory statement did NOT constitute libel per se.

in order to recover Libel per seo Libel per se is a libel on the face of the statement and is

damages. Distinction between Libel per se and Libel per quodo A Pl may recover general damages where the defamation in question constitutes libel per

se. Actionable per seo When the defamatory words are actionable per se, the law conclusively presumes the

existence of injury to the plaintiff's reputation. Burden of Proofo He is required neither to plead nor to prove it. Recoveryo The individual plaintiff is entitled to recover, as

reputation and for the humiliation and (2) mental sufferingo Whether a publication is libelous per se is a question for the court In This Caseo Pl has not show actual economic damages.o Pl must prove that the Df - statements constitute libel per se. Two of the general classes of libel (generally recognized, are actionable per se)1. Libels charging crimes and2. Libels which injure a man in his profession and calling. . . .o To fall within the category of libels that are actionable per se because they charge crime,

the libel must be one which charges a crime which involves moral turpitude or to infamous penalty is attached."

Moral Turpitudeo Moral turpitude involves an act of inherent baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and

social duties which man does to his fellow man or to society in general, contrary to the accepted rule of right and duty between man and law.

o Ex: Hitting lady over the head with a purse.

Plaintiff Alleges Reputationo Reputation in the community has been damaged as a consequence of defamatory

statements contained in the subject letter.o The plaintiff's claim is based largely on the defendant's assertion in the letter that the club

has "political connections in both state and local, to Mafia connections to rubber stamp whatever [it] want[s].

Plaintiff Claims Mafiao The Mafia generally is known to be involved in criminal activities such as bribery, illegal

gambling, manufacturing of narcotics and other acts.o Those are crimes, many of which involve moral turpitude and are punishable by

imprisonment. Plaintiff Claim Letter when beyond suggestingo It stated that the plaintiff uses its Mafia connections to "rubber stamp whatever [it] want[s].o Club utilizes illegal tactics to get whatever its wants. Appellant Courto We agree with the plaintiff that the allegedly defamatory statement is of the type that will

"diminish the esteem, respect, goodwill or confidence in which the plaintiff is held, or to excite adverse, derogatory, or unpleasant feelings or opinions against [it].

o The statement linking the plaintiff to the Mafia was libelous per se and, consequently, that the plaintiff was required neither to plead nor

Holdingo Reversed Summary Judgment and the case is remanded

Neiman-Marcus v. Lait, 13 F.R.D. 311 Southern District Court of New York

Chapter 17 Title Defamation

Page 708 Topic Defamation Denied

Quick Notes

A Book makes references to models as $100 call girls, to saleswomen that went for $20/night, and to salesmen being fairies. This is about the size of class groups that are suing for libel. If the size if large, none can sue, unless a particular member if referred too. If the class is small, and each and every member of the group is referred to, then any individual member can sue.


Issueo Whether the charge against several individuals under some general description or general name has the personal

application averred [affirmed] by the Pl? It depends on the size of the group.

Procedure

Districto The Individual saleswomen do not state a claim.o Motion to dismiss their cause of action is granted with leave to file separate complains

Facts Rules

o Pl - Neiman-Marcuso Df - LaitWhat happened?o The defendants are authors of a

book entitled 'U.S.A. Confidential'.o The plaintiffs are the Neiman-

Marcus Company, a Texas corporation operating a department store at Dallas, Texas, and there three groups of its employees.

Three groupso (1) Nine individual models who

constitute the entire group of models at the time of the publication

o (2) Fifteen salesmen of a total of twenty-five suing on their own behalf and on behalf of the

o (3) Thirty saleswomen of a total of 382 suing on their own behalf and on behalf of the others.

Books reference to themo The models were $100 call girlso The saleswomen went for

$20/night.o The salesmen are fairies.

Libel Rules for groups or classeso Where the group or class libeled is large, none

inclusive.o Where the group or class libeled is small, and each and every member of the group or class

is referred to, then any individual member can sue. Conflict Arises (Split of Opinion)o When the publication libels some or less than all of the designated group.o Some courts say no cause of action exists for ANY individual.o Other courts would allow an action. Texaso Has not spoken on the some allegation of libel. New Yorko Has spoken to some.o Question to the jury. Whether the 'charge against several individuals, under some general

description or general name * * * has the personal application averred by the plaintiff?Court AdoptedRestatement of Torts 564, Illustration 2, Comment (c) reads as followso A newspaper publishes the statement that some

murder. In the absence of any circumstances indicating that some particular member of B's household was referred to, the newspaper has defamed

o Restatement would authorize suit by each member of a small group. In This Case Salesmen (There is a cause of actiono Motion to dismiss is denied.o They have a cause of action because they are members of a small class and it is alleged

that most are fairies.

In This Case Saleswomen (No cause of actiono The books speaks of saleswomen generally and does not use the word all.o The group is extremely large.o No specific individual is named. Restatement of Torts 564(c) large class not referred to a particular persono But where the group or class disparaged is a large one,

a particular plaintiff as the person defamed, has a cause of action.

Df Argo Libel cannot reasonably be said to concern more than the saleswoman as a class.o There is no language ascertaining a person.o Nor is the class so small that it follow that defamation of the class infects the individuals of

the class. Holdingo No reasonable man would take the writers seriously.o There is no reference to any individual saleswoman. Large Group Exceptionso Even where the group is large, a member of the group may have a cause of action if some

particular circumstances point to the plaintiff as the person defamed. Courts Response to Exceptiono No such circumstances are alleged in the amended complaint. Referred to Plaintiff Exceptiono Where a plaintiff can satisfy a jury that the words referred solely or especially to himself. Courts Response to Exceptiono Insufficient to satisfy this requirement. Holdingo The Individual saleswomen do not state a claim.o Motion to dismiss their cause of action is granted with leave to file separate complains.

Class Notes

A Book makes references to models as $100 call girls, to saleswomen that went for $20/night, and to salesmen being fairies.the size of class groups that are suing for libel. If the size if large, none can sue, unless a particular member if referred too.small, and each and every member of the group is referred to, then any individual member can sue. *** This is Called Group Libel ***Libel Rules for groups or classeso Where the group or class libeled is large, none can sue even though the language used is inclusive.o Where the group or class libeled is small, and each and every member of the group or class is referred to, then

member can sue. Court AdoptedRestatement of Torts 564, Illustration 2, Comment (c) reads as follows:o A newspaper publishes the statement that some member of B's household has committed murder. In the absence of any

circumstances indicating that some particular member of B's household was referred to, the newspaper has defamed B's household.'

o Restatement would authorize suit by each member of a small group.

Lent v. Huntoon, 470 A.2d 1162 Supreme Court of Vermont


Page 714 Topic Defamation Defined

Quick Notes Libel, slander, exception to actionable per se, defenses to slander, and liability to defamation.


Issue o Whether?

Procedure

Trial o Trial jury found Huntoon liable for defamation. $15,000 in compensatory

Supreme o Affirmed

Facts Reason

o Pl - Lento Df - HuntoonWhat happened?o The Pl - worked for Huntoon

Business machines for 13 years.o The Pl told the Df he was moving to

Florida and would train his successor.

o Shortly thereafter, the Df fired the Pl without notice.

Lento Created his own equipment

business, mainly cash register sales and service.

o He was now in competition with Huntoon

Huntoon Written Libel Conducto Sent a letter cash register franchise

customers, saying Lent was discharged for sound business reasons.

Huntoon Oral Slander Conducto Said Lent had a criminal record a

mile long.o Stolen merchandize and money.o Incompetent and untrustworthy.Affected Lento Letter caused Pl to become

estranged from customers.o Physical and emotion discomfort.Evidence Against Huntoono There was never a complaint

concerning Lent before he was terminated.

o Huntoon knew Lent was leaving and he was not fired.

o Huntoon continued to make statement about Lent even after Lent asked him to stop.

o Defamation is composed of libel and slandero Libel - Written and more seriouso Slander Oral and less serious. Libelo Considered to be actionable per se.o The Pl need not allege nor prove he suffered any special damages

proximate result of libel. o Special damages are presumed.o Example: Loss of customers or business, loss of contracts, or loss of employment. Slandero Generally not actionable per se.o Special damages are not presumed and must be alleged and proven. Slander Exceptions to actionable per se, and special damages need not be provenSpoken defamation involving:(1) Imputation [attribution] of a crime,(2) Statements injurious to one's trade, business or occupation,(3) Charges of having a loathsome disease were deemed slander per se and were actionable

without proof of special damages.(4) Charging a woman to be unchaste. General Elements of Private Action For Defamation (libel and/or slander)(1) a false and defamatory statement concerning another;(2) some negligence, or greater fault, in publishing the statement;(3) Publication to at least one third person;(4) Lack of privilege in the publication;(5) Special damages, unless actionable per se; and(6) Some actual harm so as to warrant compensatory damages. Special Rule of Procedureo One the Pl - evidence was in, the court had to determine whether the written or spoken

words were defamatory as a matter of law.o If the court was in doubt because the connotation of the written or spoken words was

ambiguous, then the court had to submit the question to the jury to decide.o We are talking about economic or pecuniary damages.o Ex: Loss of customers, business, contracts, or employment. General Damages Non Economic or Non Pecuniary damages

Ex: harm to reputation, humiliation, or emotion or mental distress. Tradition Tort Ruleo Pl could not recovery any general damages unless he or she could prove special damages. Libel Actionso Libel per se means defamatory as a matter of law which is actionable per se.o Since all libel is actionable per se, it makes no difference

written words are defamatory as a matter of law, or that the written words are and the jury determines that there is defamation; in each instance not be proven.

Libel per quodo Some writings, however, are seemingly innocent in and of themselves, and resort must be

had to extrinsic evidence to determine if they have defamatory qualities.o If the writing together with the extrinsic evidence constitutes defamation, such a writing is

referred to as "libel per quod" in several American jurisdictions.o These jurisdictions require that special damages be proven for libel per quod, unless the

libel falls into one of the slander per se exceptions.o Under this rule, the simple fact that extrinsic evidence must be used to prove the defamatory

nature of a libel prevents it from being "actionable per seproven.

Supreme Court of Vermonto Does not recognize libel per quod.o We hold that libel, whether defamatory on the face of the

extrinsic evidence, is actionable per se. Ruleo The jury decides if a writing is ambiguous or not. In This Caseo One count for libelo Once count for slander. Defenses to defamationo Trutho Privilege

Trutho Defeats the action and is a COMPLETE defense. Privilege (Protecting your own business interest, prof said not on examo Is a conditional privilege which may be overcome by a showing of malice.o The burden of proving privilege is on the Df.o Pl may defeat malice, however, he must show malice by clear and convincing proof. Df Alleged Privilegeo To protect his legitimate business interests. Inferring Maliceo The court will infer malice upon a showing that the defendant

false or acted with reckless disregard of its trutho Actual malice includes spiteful or wanton conduct Liability for Defamationo Must logically be based on some showing of harm to the Pl.o This court will require defamation Pl - to demonstrate some actual harm as a prerequisite to

recovering general damages.o Defamation that is actionable per se will require some showing of actual harm, but not of

special damages before recovery of general, or compensatory, damages. Punitive Damageso Once general (compensatory) damages are established, punitive damages may be awarded

on a showing of actual malice, but actual malice may not be considered to enhance compensatory damages.

o "[Malice] may be shown by conduct manifesting personal ill will or carried out under circumstances evidencing insult or oppression, or even by conduct showing a reckless or wanton disregard of one's rights."

o Malice supporting punitive damages may be shown by proving that the defendant repeated the defamatory statement, especially when the of the lawsuit.

Holding Ample evidence for the jury to have found actual malice(1) Defendants knew that plaintiff had not been fired "for sound business reasons" but had, in

fact, voluntarily left,(2) Huntoon said that plaintiff had stolen money and merchandise knowing this to be false,(3) Huntoon knew that plaintiff did not have a "record a mile long," and(4) Huntoon repeated the alleged slanderous statements.

AFFIRMED

Class Notes

Slander Exceptions to actionable per se, and special damages need not be provenSpoken defamation involving:(1) Imputation [attribution] of a crime,(2) Statements injurious to one's trade, business or occupation,(3) Charges of having a loathsome disease.(4) Charging a woman to be unchaste.

General Elements of Private Action For Defamation (libel and/or slander)(1) a false and defamatory statement concerning another;(2) some negligence, or greater fault, in publishing the statement;(3) Publication to at least one third person;(4) Lack of privilege in the publication;(5) Special damages, unless actionable per se; and(6) Some actual harm so as to warrant compensatory damages.

Special Rule of Procedureo One the Pl - evidence was in, the court had to determine whether the written or spoken words o If the court was in doubt because the connotation of the written or spoken words was ambiguous

question to the jury to decide.o We are talking about economic or pecuniary damages.o Ex: Loss of customers, business, contracts, or employment. General Damages Non Economic or Non Pecuniary damages Ex: harm to reputation, humiliation, or emotion or mental distress. Tradition Tort Ruleo Pl could not recovery any general damages unless he or she could prove special damages. Libel per se and slander per se are treated the same way.o Slander is defamatory on its face. Actionable per se it is actionable without the Pl have to prove damages.

New York Times v. Sullivan376 U.S. 254 (1964)

The Times ran an advertisement to help solicit funds to defend

Martin Luther King Jr., who was being prosecuted in Alabama. The ad criticized the Montgomery Alabama police, and by implication, Sullivan, the city commissioner.

Turns out, some of the allegations were factually untrue.Sullivan was hurt by the accusation and ended up suing the Times for defamation of character.

Under Alabama law, Sullivan didn’t have to show that he had actually been harmed, and that there was no defense of free speech available unless the allegations were true.

The Trial Court found for Sullivan and awarded him $500k in damages, the Times appealed.

The Times argued that allowing Sullivan to sue them for libel was an unconstitutional infringement of their 1st Amendment right to free speech, even though their allegations turned out to be false.

The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed. The Times appealed.The US Supreme Court reversed.

The US Supreme Court found that the 1st Amendment applies to all speech, even if it turns out that that speech contains falsehoods.

There is an exception. Statements made with actual malice are not protected.

Actual malice means with knowledge that the statements are false or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity.

Basically, this case says that if you publish something you think is true, and it turns out to be false, you can’t be sued for libel. But if you knowingly and maliciously publish something that is false, then you are not protected by the 1st Amendment.

This was later narrowed to only cover public figures. Dun and Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc. (472 U.S. 749 (1985)), said that if you publish something about a private figure that turns out to be false, you can be sued, even though you thought it was true at the time.

Gertz v. Robert Welch, 418 U.S. 323 United States Supreme Court


Topic Public Figures and Private Plaintiffs

Quick Notes Welch published an article accusing Gertz of being a communist in a conspiracy against the police.


Issue

o Whether a newspaper or broadcaster that publishes defamatory falsehoods about an individual who is neither a public official not a public figure may claim a constitutional privilege against liability for the injury inflicted by those statements?No, but a States rights are limited to compensatory damages. You need to prove knowledge of falsity or recklessness for punitive damages.

Procedure

District o Judgment for Welch.

Supreme o Reversed and Remanded.

Facts Rules

o Pl - Gertzo Df - Robert WelchWhat happened?o Gertz was representing a family

who son was killed by a Chicago policeman.

o Welch publishes the American Opinion.

American Opiniono It contained conspiracy views

discrediting law enforcement and the police force was capable of supporting a communist dictatorship.

o It contained an article that the Officer was framed and the testimony against him was false.

o Furthermore, his prosecution was part of the Communist campaign against the police.

o Welch portrayed Gertz Leninist, a former Communist and an official of

Rule Of Law1. The standard of liability for a defamation which a publisher or broadcaster publishes about a

private individual is set by the states.2. The private defamation plaintiff must prove falsity or reckless disregard for the truth to

recover any punitive damages other than compensatory for actual injury. First Remedy Self Helpo Using available opportunities to contradict the lie or correct the error and thereby to

minimize its adverse impact on reputation.o Public Officials have great access to channels than a private individualo Private individuals are therefore more vulnerable to injury, and the state interest in

protecting them is correspondingly greater Public Official Reasoningo An individual who decides to seek governmental office must accept certain necessary

consequences of that involvement in public affairs.o Few personal attributes are more germane to fitness for office than dishonesty,

malfeasance, or improper motivation, even though these characteristics may also affect the official's private character.

Become A Public Figure by no action of his owno By accident he obtained prominence

the Marxist League for Industrial Democracy.

Article Inaccuracieso Gertz had not criminal record.o Gertz did not plan any

demonstrations.o No basis to be called a Leninist or

communist.o Editor made not effort to verify the

charges against Gertz.District Court Rulingo For Welch, because he was a

private individual.

o By occupying positions of persuasiono If they can influence the resolution of a public controversy then they invite attention and

comment.o The communications media are entitled to act on the

public figures have voluntarily exposed themselves to increased risk of injury from defamatory falsehood concerning them.

Private Individual Rule and Test Argumento No such assumption is justified with respect to a private individual.o He has not accepted public office or assumed an "influential role in ordering society."o He has relinquished no part of his interest in the protection of his own good name,o He has a more compelling call on the courts for redress of injury inflicted by defamatory

falsehood.o Private individuals are not only more vulnerable to injury than public officials and public

figures; they are also more deserving of recovery Courts New York Times Extension to Private Citizens o Add difficulty of forcing state and federal judges to decide on an ad hoc basis which

publications address issues of "general or public interest".o The "public or general interest" test for determining the applicability of the New York Times

standard to private defamation actions inadequately serves both of the competing values at stake.

Holding #1 A State can impose liability with faulto So long as the State does not impose liability without fault, the States may define for

themselves the appropriate standard of liability for a publisher or broadcaster of defamatory falsehood injurious to a private individual.

Holding #2 Compensatory and Punitive Recoveryo This State interest extends no further than o The States may not permit recovery of presumed

liability is not based on a showing of knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth.(Permitted when knowledge of falsity or recklessness is show).

Defamation Common Lawo It allows recovery of purportedly compensatory damages o The existence of injury is presumed from the fact of publication.

State Remedies Are Grounded by the First Amendmento States remedies for defamatory falsehood reach no farther than are necessary to protect the

legitimate interest.o Restricts defamation plaintiffs who do not prove knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard

for the truth to compensation for actual injury.o All awards must be supported by competent evidence concerning the injury, although there

need be no evidence which assigns an actual dollar value to the injury.o Competent Evidence - Impairment of reputation and standing in the community, personal

humiliation, and mental anguish and suffering Punitive Damages No State Justificationo Juries use discretion selectively to punish unpopular opinions.o The States interest justifies a negligence standard for private defamation.o This is a less demanding standard than proving NYT actual malice. Df Arg #1 Gertz was a public officialo No basis, he was only on a hosing committee for a short period of time. Df Arg #2 Gertzs conorers inquest appearance rendered him the "de facto public official."o We decline. This would make all lawyers public officials. Df Arg #3 Gertz was a public figureo He did not game general fame or notoriety in the community.o His role was minimal at the coroners inquest.o Took not part in criminal trial.o Never discussed any litigation with the press.o Did not thrust himself into the public issue. Reversed Trial Court, Remanded DISSENT Burgero The important public policy which underlies this tradition -- the right to counsel -- would be

gravely jeopardized if every lawyer who takes an "unpopular" case, civil or criminal, would automatically become fair game for irresponsible reporters and editors who might, for example, describe the lawyer as a "mob mouthpiece" for representing a client with a serious prior criminal record, or as an "ambulance chaser" for representing a claimant in a personal injury action.

DISSENT Douglaso The jury is unpredictable.o It is only the publisher who will engage in discussion in the fact of such risk.o The courts stands increase the risk.o The First and the Fourthteen amendments prohibit damages discussion public affairs. DISSENT Brenneno Matters of public or general interest do not "suddenly become less so merely because a

private individual is involved or because in some sense the individual did not 'voluntarily' choose to become involved."

o The very possibility of having to engage in litigation, an expensive and protracted process, is threat enough to cause discussion and debate to 'steer far wider of the unlawful zone' thereby keeping protected discussion from public cognizance

Class Notes

Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.o Private Figures, Media Defendant, Matters of Public Concern

Negligence is Required There has to be at least negligence on behalf of the media defendant for a cause of action.

This is not strict liability (no liability without fault). There must be at least negligence

Punitive and Presumed Damages

There CANNOT be punitive damages or presumed damages, UNLESS The Df knew the statement was false, OR Made it with reckless disregard of whether it was false.

States Interesto To allow an individual a remedy who interest where injured because of defamation. Private Individual + Media Defendant + Public Concern Ruleo The private individual needs to prove negligence only.

o He does not have to prove actual malice. ***** Public Figure (He keeps saying this phrase)***** Injecting oneself into the vortex of public opinion o Can a state say you have to prove actual malice? Yes. There is a minimal level that states have to provide, they can go above, but

not below.

defamation case briefs

Documents