Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Defamation by Mind Map: Defamation

1. Common Law

1.1. Elements Basic

1.1.1. Defamatory Words

1.1.2. Pulication

1.1.3. Extrinsic Facts (Inducement)

1.1.3.1. Additional details that add to the defamatory flare of statement

1.1.4. Formal Allegation( Colloquium)

1.1.4.1. He did, she did, would reasonable reader establish the same person

1.1.4.1.1. New Topic

1.1.4.2. New Topic

1.1.5. Allegation of Particular Meaning (innuendo)

1.1.5.1. Understood to mean an act

1.1.6. Special Damages

1.1.7. Reasonable Colloquium and Innuendo

1.1.8. Truth as Affirmative Defense

1.1.8.1. At common law, truth was a defense. Substantial truth was shown to disprove claims

1.1.8.1.1. All statements were defamatory

1.1.8.1.2. Defendant must raise truth and holds burden

1.1.8.1.3. Plaintiff now holds burden of proving falsity

1.2. Distinction of Libel and Slander

1.2.1. Libel

1.2.1.1. publication of defamatory matter by written of printed words. By its embodiment in physical form or any other form of communication w/ potentially harmful qualities of written or printed words

1.2.1.2. Libel per Se Elements

1.2.1.2.1. Defamatory words

1.2.1.2.2. of and concerning plaintiff

1.2.1.2.3. publication

1.2.1.2.4. Libel Per Se

1.2.1.3. Libel per Quod

1.2.1.3.1. Adds elements to libel per se

1.2.1.3.2. not defamatory on its face

1.2.2. Slander

1.2.2.1. Consists of the publication of defamatory matter by spoken words, transitory gestures or by any form of communication other than those being libel

1.2.2.1.1. Special damages required.

1.2.2.2. Not as harmful due to permanency

1.2.2.2.1. 4 Exceptions

2. Const. Developments

2.1. First amendment balancing.

2.2. Civil action for libel will lie when there has been a false and unprivileged publication by letter or otherwise which exposes a person to distrust, hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy or which can injure a person in his profession.

2.2.1. Presumed damages

2.2.2. Court will determine if defamatory inference, Jury determines if understood as defamatory

2.2.3. It is enough that some feel the defamatory remark is true

2.2.3.1. only a small amount need to have to defame. Larger= ^ damages.

2.3. Diversity jursidiction

2.3.1. If resident sues another state resident, may defendant may remove to federal court

2.4. Actual Malice Standard

2.4.1. Not libel unless intended to be of him.

2.4.1.1. Clear and convincing evidence

2.4.2. Knowingly false statement or a statement made w/ reckless disregard for the truth

2.4.2.1. Public officials must show.

2.5. Negligence in Misstatements

2.5.1. Private person must show

2.6. 3 types of public Figrue

2.6.1. 1. Universal Public figure

2.6.2. 2. Limited public figure

2.6.2.1. thrust themselves into the vortex of issue and become public figure for that problem, then retreat to their private status

2.6.3. 3. Involuntary Public Figure

2.6.3.1. One who is thrust into the spotlight

2.7. Public V. Private Concern

2.7.1. If private matter, with private person, strict liability or negligence/faslsity

2.7.2. Public matter, Public Figure must shwo Actual Malice

2.7.3. Private person, public matter, negligence as to truth or falsity, or actual malice

3. Group Libel

3.1. If group is large, no one can sue

3.2. Where small and each is reffered to any individual may sue (25 or less)

3.3. In large group, if something singles out one or creates intense suspicion towards one, individual may bring claim

3.4. Must demonstrate Colloquium

4. Special Cases

4.1. If in another language, heard, but not understood, No cause of Action

4.2. Pecuniary nature to have out of pocket losses

4.3. Publication doesn't mean art, merely to person other than the defamed

4.4. Must have been negligent or intentional (concealed listener doesn't count)

4.5. If sent to defamed, but ready by 3rd party, no defamation. If know 3rd party will read, defamation

4.6. Single publication rule

4.6.1. Clock begins at first publication, not each subsequent publication

5. Internet

5.1. Communication and decency act

5.1.1. Interactive computer service

5.1.1.1. Other users generate content and you post it

5.1.1.1.1. No defamation action

5.1.1.1.2. Immunity!

5.1.2. Information Content provider

5.1.2.1. Generate data and content

5.1.2.1.1. Subject to defamation action

6. Priveleges

6.1. Judicial, legislative, witness testimony

6.1.1. Immunity when in court or in session

6.2. Qualified

6.2.1. to tell person true negative facts when making reference. Cannot exceed scope, or no longer qualified

6.3. Reporter's privelege

6.3.1. Must be fair, accurate, disinterested facts

6.3.2. In reporting public proceedings, public records, and official acts

6.4. Fair Comment

6.4.1. Publisher may offer criticism on matters of public concern

7. Remedies

7.1. Damages

7.1.1. Libel proof- Plaintiff may posses such an atrocious reputation they are immune from libel suit

7.1.2. Incremental harm Doctrin

7.1.2.1. Only pleads part of article is incorrect. Is harm real if such a hit taken already

7.1.3. Bad Reputation

7.1.3.1. Evidence of may reduce damages

7.2. Punitive damages

7.2.1. Common law malice required

7.3. Nominal Damages

7.3.1. Doesn't inspire deterrence, not much of a point to include

7.4. Injunctive relief

7.4.1. supplement to relief that is determined in court that a statement is both defamatory and false, even though defendant continues to publish

7.5. Declaratory Judgement

7.5.1. Obtain a judicial declaration statement is false to vindicate reputation, making plaintiff whole, as much as law can