Threatened with Character Defamation ... should I be worried?

[Ed Henry]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NY
I recently came across a bounced check of a previous employee in a local store and took a picture of the check with my cell phone. When a currently employee in my store found out the picture he asked to see it. It turned out that this was a set up and the previous employee was standing around a corner when I showed the picture of the check to the current employee and two other employees in a non-public area. I was led to answer a few questions that made it look like I though the situation was funny. I never said anything that wasn't true. Now I am getting calls from the previous employee that I am going to be sued for "harassment" and "character defamation." Do I have anything to worry about? A nasty phone conversation and a threat are one thing, but is something like this actionable? Would an attorney take a case like this?

If this is a set up to extract money from me by the two employees, is it worth reporting to the authorities?

Thanks.
EGWhat is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[Hot Topic]

Are you asking if you're going to be in "hot water" because you took a picture of a previous employee's "bounced" check for a reason that would seem to be less than honorable? You then showed the picture to three current employees.

If the case goes to court, the employee won't win because he participated in a scheme to entrap you into doing something unethical. And you obliged when you "lived down" to his expectations.

This scheme could get you all in trouble with your employer. You should worry about that as you lay awake at night thinking, "Why didn't I pick up the check and mail it to the guy the next day?"

 

[cyjeff]

How did you get a copy of the check?

Was it in plain view or did you get a behind the scenes look?

 

[Ed Henry]

the photocopy of the check was posted on every register at the local grocery store. what I saw and took a photo of was a copy of the check. I never saw the original. The previous employee is threatening me with "character defamation" and "harassment." The previous employee says that a lawyer has already been contacted and that I will be "served." This seems rediculous, but it is still a bit scarry.

 

[quincy]

Photographing stamps, currency or security obligations (checks, money orders, automobile titles, stock certificates, etc) is illegal unless done following specific government guidelines. For instance, there are federal statutes that regulate the sizes and colors that can be used when making reproductions of currency (photographic reproductions or otherwise). Photographing a check, as you have, can get you arrested on suspicion of counterfeiting, forgery or identity theft.

Anyone whose personal bank account information is compromised can find themselves victims of identity theft. Identity thieves can use bank account numbers, driver's license numbers, checking account numbers, names, and phone numbers to open new accounts in another person's name.

In addition, photographing someone's bounced check could potentially lead to a defamation action, depending on who you showed this bounced check to and what you said about the person who wrote and bounced the check.

If, for instance, you accused this check writer of being a crook and the check actually bounced due to a bank error, or because of a government delay in regularly scheduled deposits of social security funds or government checks, or whatever, and it bounced through no fault of the check-writer himself, that could lead to a defamation action against you.

The display of bounced checks for the public to view has led to invasion of privacy actions in the past, and most stores that used to display NSF checks by their cash registers as a regular practice have since stopped.

And, finally, photographing checks can get you fired in a hurry.

In other words, what you did was incredibly stupid. WHY would you photograph anyone's check in the first place????

You might want to check with an attorney in your area to get a better idea of how vulnerable you may be to a lawsuit or arrest. I imagine the other employees will do nothing more than make you squirm for awhile, but you never know.

 

[Ed Henry]

I said nothing about the person who wrote the check. It was the other employee that "encouraged" me to show the check that did the talking. I never even said that the ex-employee bounced it, just that it was posted up in a grocery store. The photo was on a cell phone camera and has long since been erased. I can't say if the acct information was even readable. Obviously, I saw the check in a public place.

As for the why, obviously I shouldn't have. It was an ex-employee that no one really cared for and it appeared amusing. Dumb, dumb, dumb, on my part. But the question is, should I be concerned from a legal perspective, especially considering that I was set up to show the check when the ex-employee was around to make me (a) reveal that I had the photo and (b) to say it was funny that I saw it.

Again, it is the fact that the ex-employee is threatening to take me to court that makes me ask if I really should be worried.

 

[Ed Henry]

The photographing issues are not central to this question. What I am looking advice on is the character defamation aspect. Everything I am reading seems to state that for there to be character defamation, I would have had to have done/said something untrue and caused damage. I showed a picture of and spoke about a truthful event, so I don't see how that meets the definition of character defamation. Hurting someone's feelings is mean, and even though I was baited into it, I don't see how that is damaging in a legal sense. Talking to three ex-coworkers about a truthful, although unflattering event, is not going to have an economic impact.

Anyone can sue for anything I suppose, but doesn't there have to be some legal ground somewhere to actually have a case?

 

[Alex23]

It sounds like your actions didn't cause any damage to the reputation of the check-kiter that he didn't cause himself.

What is he going to sue you for?

 

[Hot Topic]

As quincy pointed out, it's not a given that the ex-employee was responsible for the check bouncing. The question of reporting a "truthful event" may therefore be a little clouded in this case.

How can the OP be sure that photographing the check has no relevance should the matter go to court?

 

[Ed Henry]

I have learned that the ex-employee has bounced checks all over town including here. So that will help support the truth. Also I never said the check bounced, just that it was posted (with a handwritten note below it saying not to let the checkwriter in the store again). The person is question called me on the phone and in a 30 min tirade said I was going to be taken to court. But I have to imagine any attorney would not want a client discussing the case rather than yelling at me and arguing over how the conversation went.

I am to be sued for "Defamation of Character" and "Harassment"

 

[quincy]

Defamation would be hard for the ex-employee to prove, unless the reason the ex-employee's check was posted was that his checks and personal information were stolen and he is a victim of identity theft. Then the posting of the check could be at the ex-employee's request, to advise all cashiers that checks written on that account should not be accepted.

If that or something similar is not the reason the check was posted, then I imagine an harassment action could be easier for the ex-employee to pursue with some chance of success. Photographing his check and showing it to others, for whatever reason, could potentially be seen as harassment. I also imagine you said something about the ex-employee when you displayed the check, as well, and did not simply respond to questions asked about it. The employees you showed the check to could testify to that, if you did say anything derogatory or defamatory about the ex-employee at that time.

At any rate and whatever the case, if a complaint is filed against you, you should get an attorney. Whether the ex-employee has any action against you he could win would be up to a court to decide.

And I still think your biggest worry should be over photographing the check in the first place. There is no legitimate reason, that I can see, where that particular action by you can be excused.

Bottom line: Yes, this guy can sue you. And, if he does, yes, you should be worried. But, if all of the facts are as you describe, it sounds unlikely that this ex-employee will go to the expense of bringing any suit against you. In other words, worry when you need to.

 

[jammin68]

I have learned that the ex-employee has bounced checks all over town including here.

If this is true, I really doubt that this person would find the resources to pay a retainer to any attorney, unless it's a family related lawyer with lots of time on their hands.

Also, when one hires an attorney, they usually don't advertise to their opponent that they will be serving you papers soon - it's strategically absurd. It sounds like they are just trying to make you sweat a bit.

 

[You Are Guilty]

Good grief, if the guy is bouncing checks all across town, how is he going to pay a huge retainer to a lawyer to file a BS lawsuit??

And to the extent taking a cell phone photo of a photocopy of something a store posted is illegal (possibly, but I haven't checked the statutes myself), there certainly isn't a civil cause of action in NY for it that the employee can sue you for. If it is illegal (again, big IF), then it's up to the local US Attorney's office to prosecute and (my guess is they have bigger fish to fry than you).

 

[quincy]

First, YAG, it seems to me that the ex-employee can merely write a check to the attorney.

You sound a bit skeptical about the existence of laws regarding the taking of photos of checks?? There are state and federal laws both, and federal guidelines specifically for photographers.

When time allows, check out U.S. Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 25 §470 - 514 and caselaw - U.S. v. Wethington, 141 F.3d 284, 287 (6th Cir 1998) and Stinson v U.S., 316 F.2d 554, 555 (5th Cir 1963) and U.S. v Parr, 716 F.2d 796, 808 (11th Cir 1983) and Boggs v Bowron, 842 F.Sup.542, 559-560 (D.D.C. 1993) and Boggs v Rubin, 161 F.3d 37 (D.C. Cir 1998) . . . . . . and many many others.

But, you are right. The odds of any suit arising from this are slim to none.

 

[You Are Guilty]

First, YAG, it seems to me that the ex-employee can merely write a check to the attorney.

lol
Any attorney willing to take a case like this certainly knows to let the check clear before starting work

You sound a bit skeptical about the existence of laws regarding the taking of photos of checks?? There are state and federal laws both, and federal guidelines specifically for photographers.

Not skeptical, merely no first hand knowledge so I can't swear to their existence or non-existence.

When time allows, check out U.S. Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 25 §470 - 514 and caselaw - U.S. v. Wethington, 141 F.3d 284, 287 (6th Cir 1998) and Stinson v U.S., 316 F.2d 554, 555 (5th Cir 1963) and U.S. v Parr, 716 F.2d 796, 808 (11th Cir 1983) and Boggs v Bowron, 842 F.Sup.542, 559-560 (D.D.C. 1993) and Boggs v Rubin, 161 F.3d 37 (D.C. Cir 1998) . . . . . . and many many others.

I don't have a lot of time at the moment, but just skimming the statute titles from 470, et seq., it certainly doesn't seem like any would be applicable to a cell phone photo of a xeroxed check. But again, I have not read them, so if it's in there, feel free to narrow my search.

But, you are right. The odds of any suit arising from this are slim to none.

And slim just left town. Amen.