What’s the foolproof trick to avoid defamation lawsuits?
Is it hiring an attorney experienced in defamation law? Actually, no. Because it’s impossible to predict the outcome of a slander or libel lawsuit. But what you can do is never lie about a person or a business publicly. Or, to put it another way, you can avoid publishing or broadcasting anything that assumes you know what a person is thinking and what motivated them to do or say something.
You can also avoid being ambiguous and say exactly what you mean, making it harder for your subject’s attorney to ascribe meaning to your words.
Bottom line: If you only tell the truth, and have concrete evidence to back up that truth, the chances of someone attacking you for defamation are between slim and none. And if you are sued, truth is a defense against slander and libel in American courts.
What’s so weird about telling the truth? Unfortunately it’s a surprisingly low priority for many people on the internet, where only a click stands between a person’s emotions and the rest of the world.
Noonan v. Staples: When Truth Wasn’t Enough of a Defamation Defense
There have been a couple very rare exceptions to the truth as a defamation defense rule. The most notable case occurred in 2009 in Massachusetts, in Noonan v. Staples, where Alan Noonan had been fired from his job at Staples, the office supply store. Company brass sent all employees an email describing how and why they fired Noonan. Noonan sued, arguing that Staples had defamed him. He admitted he’d been fired, but the trial court agreed with Noonan’s claim that Staples had demonstrated “actual malice.” Since the company had never circulated such an email about employees it had fired, the court saw its actions as egregious and ruled in favor of the Noonan.
Actual malice is typically a burden of proof that public figure defamation plaintiffs must prove. But under Massachusetts law, private citizens can also claim defamation by establishing actual malice.
The Substantial Truth Clause
Another variation of the truth defense is the concept of “substantial truth.” Judges and juries are only concerned that the gist of a statement made by the defendant in a defamation suit is true, not necessarily that every single detail is true.
In one famous case, a newspaper reported that an official has wasted $80,000 of public funds. The official sued, arguing that he actually only wasted $17,000. But the court ruled for the newspaper, concluding that the amount of money was inconsequential. What mattered was that the politician wasted public money.
Defamation Law: A Two-Minute Explanation
“Defamation” is a catch-all term for any statement that hurts someone’s reputation. Written defamation is called “libel.” Spoken defamation is “slander.”
Defamation is not a crime, but it is a “tort” (a civil wrong, rather than a criminal wrong). A person who has been defamed can sue the person who did the defaming.
Defamation law tries to balance competing interests. On the one hand, people should not ruin others’ lives with lies. On the other hand, people should be able to speak freely without fear of litigation over every insult, disagreement, or mistake.
Learn More About Business Defamation
If you want to learn more about business defamation, visit our blog. If you’ve landed here because you’re in search of legal counsel involving a defamation matter, contact us. We can put you in touch with someone who will be able to help.