defamation(redirected from Defamation of character) Also found in: Dictionary/thesaurus, Medical, Acronyms, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia. DefamationAny intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a persons reputation; decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person. Defamation may be a criminal or civil charge. It encompasses both written statements, known as libel, and spoken statements, called slander. The probability that a plaintiff will recover damages in a defamation suit depends largely on whether the plaintiff is a public or private figure in the eyes of the law. The public figure law of defamation was first delineated in new york times v. sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 84 S. Ct. 710, 11 L. Ed. 2d 686 (1964). In Sullivan, the plaintiff, a police official, claimed that false allegations about him appeared in the New York Times, and sued the newspaper for libel. The Supreme Court balanced the plaintiffs interest in preserving his reputation against the publics interest in freedom of expression in the area of political debate. It held that a public official alleging libel must prove actual malice in order to recover damages. The Court declared that the First Amendment protects open and robust debate on public issues even when such debate includes vehement, caustic, unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials. A public official or other plaintiff who has voluntarily assumed a position in the public eye must prove that defamatory statements were made with knowledge that they were false or with reckless disregard of whether they were false. Where the plaintiff in a defamation action is a private citizen who is not in the public eye, the law extends a lesser degree of constitutional protection to defamatory statements. Public figures voluntarily place themselves in a position that invites close scrutiny, whereas private citizens who have not entered public life do not relinquish their interest in protecting their reputation. In addition, public figures have greater access to the means to publicly counteract false statements about them. For these reasons, a private citizens reputation and privacy interests tend to outweigh free speech considerations and deserve greater protection from the courts. (See Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 94 S. Ct. 2997, 41 L. Ed. 2d 789 [1974]). Distinguishing between public and private figures for the purposes of defamation law is sometimes difficult. For an individual to be considered a public figure in all situations, the persons name must be so familiar as to be a household word—for example, Michael Jordan. Because most people do not fit into that category of notoriety, the Court recognized the limited-purpose public figure, who is voluntarily injected into a public controversy and becomes a public figure for a limited range of issues. Limited-purpose public figures, like public figures, have at least temporary access to the means to counteract false statements about them. They also voluntarily place themselves in the public eye and consequently relinquish some of their privacy rights. For these reasons, false statements about limited-purpose public figures that relate to the public controversies in which those figures are involved are not considered defamatory unless they meet the actual-malice test set forth in Sullivan. Determining who is a limited-purpose public figure can also be problematic. In Time, Inc. v. Firestone, 424 U.S. 448, 96 S. Ct. 958, 47 L. Ed. 2d 154 (1976), the Court held that the plaintiff, a prominent socialite involved in a scandalous Divorce, was not a public figure because her divorce was not a public controversy and because she had not voluntarily involved herself in a public controversy. The Court recognized that the divorce was newsworthy, but drew a distinction between matters of public interest and matters of public controversy. In Hutchinson v. Proxmire, 443 U.S. 111, 99 S. Ct. 2675, 61 L. Ed. 2d 411 (1979), the Court determined that a scientist whose federally supported research was ridiculed as wasteful by Senator William Proxmire was not a limited-purpose public figure because he had not sought public scrutiny in order to influence others on a matter of public controversy, and was not otherwise well-known. Further readings Collins, Matthew. 2001. The Law of Defamation and the Internet. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. Friedman, Jessica R. 1995. Defamation. Fordham Law Review 64 (December). Jones, William K. 2003. Insult to Injury: Libel, Slander, and Invasions of Privacy. Boulder, Colo.: Univ. Press of Colorado. Smolla, Rodney A. 1999. Law of Defamation. 2d ed. St. Paul, Minn.: West Group. Cross-references Freedom of the Press; Libel and Slander. Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. defamation (of character)n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation. If the defamatory statement is printed or broadcast over the media it is libel and, if only oral, it is slander. Public figures, including officeholders and candidates have to show that the defamation was made with malicious intent and was not just fair comment. Damages for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malice. Some statements such as an accusation of having committed a crime, having a feared disease, or being unable to perform ones occupation are called libel per se or slander and can more easily lead to large money awards in court and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Most states provide for a demand for a printed retraction of defamation and only allow a lawsuit if there is no such admission of error. (See: fair comment) Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.defamationnoun abuse, aspersion, calumniation, calumny, denigration, derogation, detraction, disparagement, disrepute, false accusation, false publication, false report, imputation, infamy, insinuation, invective, libel, obloquy, scandal, slander, slur, smear, smirch, traducement, untruth Associated concepts: defamation against title, defamation of business or profession, defamation of character, defamation per quod, defamation per se, defamatory publication, defamatory upon its face, defamatory words, injury to charrcter or reputation, injury to profession or business Foreign phrases: Inveniens libellum famosum et non corrumpens punitur.A person who finds a libel and does not destroy it is punished. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- See also: aspersion, denunciation, dishonor, hatred, infamy, libel, malediction, obloquy, opprobrium, phillipic, scandal, shame, slander, vilification Burtons Legal Thesaurus, 4E. Copyright © 2007 by William C. Burton. Used with permission of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.DEFAMATION, tort. The speaking slanderous words of a person so as, de bona fama aliquid detrahere, to hurt his good fame. Vide Slander. 2. In the United States, the remedy for defamation is by an action on the case, where the words are slanderous. 3. In England, besides the remedy by action, proceedings may be instituted in the ecclesiastical court for redress of the injury. The punishment for defamation, in this court, is payment of costs and penance enjoined at the discretion of the judge. When the slander has been privately uttered, the penance may be ordered to be performed in a private place; when publicly uttered, the sentence must be public, as in the church of the parish of the defamed party, in time of divine service,, and the defamer may be required publicly to pronounce that by such words, naming them, as set forth in the sentence, he had defamed the plaintiff, and, therefore, that he begs pardon, first, of God, and then of the party defamed, for uttering such words. Clerks Assist. 225; 3 Burns Eccl. Law, Defamation, pl. 14; 2 Chit. Pr. 471 Cooke on Def. A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856.
Posted on: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 06:50:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015