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)

[nickcarraway]

Hmmm, on all of Free Republic these laws only apply to Michael Schiavo and no one else. As far as I can figure from wondering around FR since January 1998.

[Catspaw]

I think you are trying to say the same thing as I said. People in England have to watch themselves more than they do here. [I worked as a reporter in England}

You're right--and you said it twice :-))

There was a celeb recently who filed a libel suit in England--even though the same stuff was printed here--because of their libel laws.

[aristeides]

I have heard lurid accusations against Mr. Schiavo made by callers to such radio talk shows as Sean Hannity's. (Mind you, I suspect the accusations are substantially true, but they are certainly as lurid as anything I've seen here.)

[nickcarraway]

Do you have any idea how hard libel suits are? Do you know how many libel suits there are every year, and their sucess rates. I'd like to see the precentage of potentially libelous statements made to those that end up in courts.

[aristeides]

Richard Perle was threatening to sue Seymour Hersh in the UK for some accusations Hersh made against him in the New Yorker, until somebody argued some sense into Perle.

[Poohbah]

I have heard lurid accusations against Mr. Schiavo made by callers to such radio talk shows as Sean Hannity's. (Mind you, I suspect the accusations are substantially true, but they are certainly as lurid as anything I've seen here.)

And Fox let them go on the air?

There's a reason for the seven-second delay, and it isn't just for cuss words.

[onyx]

Well hey, were we not called a few dillies last night on another thread?

[nickcarraway]

I have heard lurid accusations against Mr. Schiavo made by callers to such radio talk shows as Sean Hannity's. (Mind you, I suspect the accusations are substantially true, but they are certainly as lurid as anything I've seen here.)

And what are the chances that they will ever see court?

[aristeides]

Hannity's radio show. They were let on the air.

[huck von finn]

See Calpernia's observation here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1007384/posts?page=342#342

She is very upfront and honest about it.

[Poohbah]

Do you have any idea how hard libel suits are? Do you know how many libel suits there are every year, and their sucess rates. I'd like to see the precentage of potentially libelous statements made to those that end up in courts.

Success wouldn't necessarily be the intended goal...merely the ruin of Free Republic, whether by winning or not.

Think about it.

[aristeides]

And what are the chances that they will ever see court?

They won't, any more than comments here will. I was trying to support your argument.

[general_re]

Lovely. Imagine the PR disaster that would have been.

[Poohbah]

Still, it's rather idiotic--WABC must be hoping that Schiavo isn't in a suing mood.

I've heard people get dumped for STARTING to say something about someone.

[honeygrl]

who was it that called someone a newbie earlier? THIS guy can ligitimately be called a newbie. What good are newbie bashers when they aren't here when you need them?

[nickcarraway]

I know you were.

[Askel5]

Its one thing to come up with principled opposition and to advocate that strongly, it is another to make direct allegations and present that as truth, when you have no actual knowledge of it and haven't bothered checking.

I'm confused.

Is this like your perpetually alleging LaBelleDameSansMerci and I were one and the same?

Or is it more like passing around electronic hearsay such as this:

---

Without naming names or being too specific, here is the story - PLEASE keep it under wraps for now. It is fresh, but doesn't need to go to the alternate site yet, as several people are now in the process of wrecking their real lives over this right now.

[... need I go on? ...]

And it is really ugly.....

---

PLEASE keep it under wraps for now.
It is fresh, but doesn't need to go
to the alternate site yet

What sort of instructions for disseminating this damaging hearsay electronically would you suppose the author of the e-mail is giving here, Counselor?

Do you really expect any of us to believe you care at all about the effect of libel and slander on "the real lives" of others?

Any chance you can vacate the glass house you habit before you go throwing stones?

These are all hypothetical questions, of course ... I have no intention of returning to this Timesink wherein you're wasting the "real lives" of folks. I've read enough.

P.S. Should be "it's one thing". You'll be wanting to dot the i's and cross the t's from here on out, I suspect, lest you be hoisted on your own petard.

[Central Scrutiniser]

Ah to hell with them all, its just enterainment, interactive performance art if you will.

[Neets]

Makes the perfect martini.

Served in something like this of course!!

[honeygrl]

Some say that Schiavo and cohorts have been lurking here on the Terri threads. Of course, I have NO idea where the info came from. I was made aware of it via freepmail and told to be careful what I say. (not by anyone on this thread currently though)