c) jury issue where multiple “reasonable” meanings (988–989; n. 3c, p. 992)(d) Strict liability except for disseminators, who must know or have reason to know of defamatory statement (pp. 1001–1002).(3) Fact.(a) “Epithets” and “true opinions” are not factual and therefore not defamatory (see n. 5 at p. 994; n. 8, p. 1018) (See I-B-2-c; II-F-2 below)(b) parody (n. 5, p. 998); review Fallwell at pp. 935– 936(8960) identification(8961) photographs, etc.(8962) corporations(8963) Agroup libel@(3) Creativity, etc.() currently serving() candidates for elected office (p. 1085)() former officials and candidates (For how long?)(3) Involuntary. (See c(2) above) (See n. 7, p. 1098)DEFAM.13TORTS Professor HubbardDEFAMATIONI. Common Law (Classic/Traditional Framework)A. Elements of Tort1. Duty/Breach (pp. 985–1009)a. Publication (n. 1, p. 989)(1) communication to at least one “third party”(2) must be at least negligent (compare post card and sealed letter)b. Defamatory Statement of Fact(Romaine (p. 986); nn 2-6, pp. 990–995))(1) Statement. Conduct can be Astatement@ (n. 2, p. 1005)(2) Defamatory(a) Definition. (p. 987; n. 4, p. 993)(b) Application of test. (pp. 988–989; n. 2, p. 990)(c) Issues in a case (n. 2, p. 990):1) What is meaning?a) literal (note 3c, p. 992)b) context(See pp. 988–989; nn. 2–3, pp. 990–993)i) external context (n. 3b at p. 992). Note requirement of pleading extrinsic facts necessary to show defamatorymeaning.ii) implication (n. 6, p. 995)1c) jury issue where multiple “reasonable” meanings (988–989; n. 3c, p. 992) 2) Is meaning defamatory? Consider:a) Audience to which aimed(n. 3a, p. 991; n. 6, p. 998; p. 997; n. 3, p. 998; n. 5 at p. 998)b) total context (See (a)-2) above, p. 991)(d) Strict liability except for disseminators, who must know or have reason to know of defamatory statement (pp. 1001–1002).(3) Fact.(a) “Epithets” and “true opinions” are not factual and therefore not defamatory (see n. 5 at p. 994; n. 8, p. 1018) (See I-B-2-c; II-F-2 below)(b) parody (n. 5, p. 998); review Fallwell at pp. 935–936c. Concerning Plaintiff (999–1001)(8960) identification (8961) photographs, etc. (8962) corporations (8963) Agroup libel@ [NOTE: Presumed false; truth an affirmative defense. Note: The requirement of “factual” is implied by recognition of need for falsity and of truth as defense.]2. Causation3. Damagesa. General rules for all damages(1) Compensatory (Problem of “libel proof” plaintiff)(n. 3, p. 1009)2(a) tangible(b) intangible(2) Nominal – vindicate reputation/dignity where no harm. (n. 3, p. 1009)(3) Punitive (nn. 3–4, p. 1009)b. Special Rules (pp. 1002–1009)(1) Libel(a) Libel is written. Movies/Radio/TV/CD=s/Internet usually treated as libel. (See n. 1, p. 1005)(b) Importance1) “General damages” (embarrassment, mental distress, etc.) presumed2) In some jurisdictions, no presumption of general damages for libel unless:a) clear on its face (i.e., no extrinsic facts are needed); or b) falls within a slander per se category (n. 3, p. 1005) (See (2)-(b) below)(2) Slander(a) No claim at all unless able to show “special damages” – i.e., specifically identifiable economic loss(b) Special damages not required if slander per se1) [serious] Crime2) loathsome Disease3) Business, trade, or profession4) unChastity/”serious sexual misconduct” (See n. 2, p. 1009)Note: See n. 2 at p. 1099 on rejection of other categories3Note: Memory aid: BCCssD(c) If special damages shown or if slander per se, then general damages may be presumed.B. Defenses1. Consent (p. 1009)2. Truth a. “Sting of the charge” (p. 1010)b. Constitutional requirement for nearly all cases today: Falsity is an element of claim. Thus, plaintiff must plead and prove falsity.(1) Where in doubt as to applicability of constitutional requirements, plaintiff should plead falsity and defendant should plead truth.c. Opinions and epithets. If statement is truly opinion in the sense of “taste,” then there is no claim because only factual matters can be true or false. (See A-1-b-(3) above)3. Privilegea. Scope: Must stay within scope; no privilege of any type if outside scope (See Carradine at p. 1012 (press statement);Shavar and Kennedy, p. 1012; Hutchinson, p. 1088)b. Types(1) Absolute (pp. 1011–1013)(a) Legislators(b) High executive officials(c) Judges(d) Litigants(e) Candidate access to broadcast media (media as defendant)(2) Qualified/conditional4(a) Abuse1) For most privileges, “actual malice” is the test, but the definition varies.a) Some tests emphasize ill will and desire to injure plaintiff – i.e., “attitude” toward plaintiffb) Some more recent cases use U.S. Supreme Court definition of “knowing falsity or reckless disregard of falsity” – i.e., “attitude” toward truth2) Some privileges arguably include a definitionof abuse within definition of privilege – e.g., fair and accurate report, motive to further common interest (Liberman at p. 1014).(b) Examples1) common interest(Liberman v. Gelstein (p. 1013))2) employer references (n. 3, p. 1015)3) credit reports (n. 4, p. 1016)4) fair and accurate report of official action, proceeding, or meeting(Medico, p. 1020; nn. 1–8, pp. 1026–1029)a) Which official actions, etc.?b) What is “official?”S.C. Bar Association?c) What is fair? Accurate?5) “fair comment” (n. 8, p. 1018) – role has been seriously eroded by Constitutional doctrine which protects opinion [Note role of statutes in 1) and 2) above]c. Burdens5(1) Defendant has burdens as to existence of privilege (and thuspossibly as to scope)(2) Plaintiff has burdens as to abuse4. Retractiona. Can affect damagesb. Legislation may expand role – e.g., by reducing or eliminating right to “general damages”5. Though not a defense, defendant may eliminate or reduce damages by arguing that plaintiff had little or no reputation to lose. (See p. 1010)6. Worker’s compensation exclusivity does not usually bar claim.C. Injunctive remedies not granted because prior restraint barred by First Amendment.D. Defamation claim does not usually survive death.II. Constitutional LawA. General Overview:1. First Amendment (FA)a. Values (See Medico at 1023–1024)(1) Improve government and public affairs(2) Citizenry -- right to know(3) Creativity, etc. b. “Chilling effect,” etc. (Medico at p. 1021; p. 1047; n. 2, p. 1052)c. Incorporation doctrine (p. 1046)d. Balance: FA values versus