Is this libel?
Donny Tsunami
2012/05/08 23:12:36
|
|
|||||
|
0 votes
|
|
0% | |||
|
0 votes
|
|
0% | |||
|
1 vote
|
|
100% | |||
libel 1) n. to publish in print (including
pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an
untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her
reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn
or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of
defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation. It is
a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper,
magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the
person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie.
Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which
claims to be fact, and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While
it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must
have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious
that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice,
however, does allow a party defamed to sue for "general damages" for
damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to
actual harm (such as loss of business) called "special damages." "Libel
per se" involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does
not require a proof of intent to get an award of general damages. Libel
against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving
members of the family to bring an action for damages. Most states
provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published
retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a
lawsuit. Governmental bodies are supposedly immune for actions for
libel on the basis that there could be no intent by a non-personal
entity, and further, public records are exempt from claims of libel.
However, there is at least one known case in which there was a financial
settlement as well as a published correction when a state government
newsletter incorrectly stated that a dentist had been disciplined for
illegal conduct. The rules covering libel against a "public figure"
(particularly a political or governmental person) are special, based on
U. S. Supreme Court decisions. The key is that to uphold the right to
express opinions or fair comment on public figures, the libel must be
malicious to constitute grounds for a lawsuit for damages. Minor errors
in reporting are not libel, such as saying Mrs. Jones was 55 when she
was only 48, or getting an address or title incorrect. 2) v. to
broadcast or publish a written defamatory statement. (See: defamation, slander, libel per se, public figure)

pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an
untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her
reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn
or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of
defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation. It is
a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper,
magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the
person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie.
Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which
claims to be fact, and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While
it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must
have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious
that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice,
however, does allow a party defamed to sue for "general damages" for
damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to
actual harm (such as loss of business) called "special damages." "Libel
per se" involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does
not require a proof of intent to get an award of general damages. Libel
against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving
members of the family to bring an action for damages. Most states
provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published
retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a
lawsuit. Governmental bodies are supposedly immune for actions for
libel on the basis that there could be no intent by a non-personal
entity, and further, public records are exempt from claims of libel.
However, there is at least one known case in which there was a financial
settlement as well as a published correction when a state government
newsletter incorrectly stated that a dentist had been disciplined for
illegal conduct. The rules covering libel against a "public figure"
(particularly a political or governmental person) are special, based on
U. S. Supreme Court decisions. The key is that to uphold the right to
express opinions or fair comment on public figures, the libel must be
malicious to constitute grounds for a lawsuit for damages. Minor errors
in reporting are not libel, such as saying Mrs. Jones was 55 when she
was only 48, or getting an address or title incorrect. 2) v. to
broadcast or publish a written defamatory statement. (See: defamation, slander, libel per se, public figure)

















In The Sacred Name Of Liberty,
Rev. Dr. Donald A. Whittlinger Jr.