Defamation of character and determining awards

[hilltop]

My bad.

I'll try this again.

Question 1: If a person wins their case for defamation of character will the reward be reduced because they were working during that time to support their family?

Here's the scenario:

She was a VP in sales. Her lawyer has told her to continue looking for employment at or near the level she once held. As instructed she has done so and has been rejected time and time again. In fact, one head hunter said because of and article that appeared in a large metropolitan area she would have a hard time finding a position at her level because it painted her in a very negative light.

She also stated that her lawyer told her NOT to go and get just any job. He told her that if she were to take a position at a level below the VP level it would jeopardize her case.

I told her that this was crazy because I find it hard to believe that if you were once a VP or even the CEO and now you're now working at a minimum wage job or better, I would think that this would help prove your case rather than hurt it.

Thanks

 

[hexeliebe]

If a person wins their case for defamation of character will the reward be reduced because they were working during that time to support their family?

And award for defamation of character, like libel and slander (all similar but legally separate and distinct) is based on measurable damages.

For example, if your 'friend' finds a job within a week or two of the defamation, at or near her previous salary, then her likelyhood of proving she was 'damaged' diminishes.

However, if she has been looking for a job for six months to a year and the only thing she can find that will accept her is flipping burgers at McDonald's, then taking the job will not diminish her damages but likely build a stronger case.

HOWEVER, without proof that her inability to find a job in her field for which she is qualified is a DIRECT result of the defamation, then she cannot show that the defamation is directly responsible for the damage she has suffered and therefore cannot recover.

She also stated that her lawyer told her NOT to go and get just any job. He told her that if she were to take a position at a level below the VP level it would jeopardize her case.

Although I disagree as per the above, since she has an attorney I would strongly suggest she heed the advice. We don't know the judge, the climate in and around her area nor do we know the specifics of the case.

I told her that this was crazy because I find it hard to believe that if you were once a VP or even the CEO and now you're now working at a minimum wage job or better, I would think that this would help prove your case rather than hurt it.

There is no way to know that unless we have the case file before us, have studied it, have interviewed the principles and become familiar with every facett of this case.

Generalities can't help at this point so as above, she should follow her attorney's advice, although it's a very dangerous game to be playing.

 

[hilltop]

Thank you for the prompt response.

Sincerely

hilltop