can agreeing with someone be called defamation

[pro_perdef]

Nevada....

Here's an interesting situation to consider.

1) Person "A" posts a comment about person "B" on some website somewhere.

2) Person "C" posts a comment on Person "A's" comment agreeing with Person "A"

3) Person "B" sues person "c," but not person "a" because somehow person "c" committed libel by agreeing with the comment posted by person "A."

Is it possible to successfully sue someone for agreeing with a comment posted by a different person for defamation, but not sue the person who posted the comment that was being agreed with?

 

[Isis1]

What class is this for?

 

[pro_perdef]

It's not for a class . This situation exists in a real lawsuit.

 

[quincy]

Yes, it is possible to sue someone under your described circumstances (and even probable, if someone has done just that ).

Generally a person who has been defamed will target in any lawsuit the original defamer, but anyone who has repeated a defamatory statement can be held equally liable for defamation.

An "I agree" on its own would not make for a very strong defamation suit, however. Person C would have had to say more about Person B than that, I would think, in order for Person B to successfully support an action against him. It really depends on what exactly Person C said.

Person A, the one who originally made the defamatory statement, would seem to be the more logical defendant.

 

[pro_perdef]

Hi Quincy...person "c" posted "agreed!" in response to person "a's" comment. Persons a & c do not know eachother.

 

[quincy]

Hi, Pro_perdef.

Just an "agreed," huh?

Does Person C know Person B well?

I suppose a suit could be successful against Person C if C is expected to have a greater personal knowledge of Person B than others do. The "agreed" could be seen, perhaps, as a confirmation of what had been stated by Person A more as speculation. The "agreed" might be given more weight than the statement made by A.

For example, if Person A is only slightly acquainted with B but makes a statement ("Person B was fired because he is a thief"), it might not have the same impact as it would if that same statement was made by Person C who is, say, B's former employer and the one who fired Person B. And, if Person B was never convicted of theft, then both C and A could be held liable for defamation.

But just an "agreed" is not much on which to base a defamation claim.

It really depends on all of the facts, including how exactly the original statement was worded, where it was published, the relationships between A, B and C. . . . . a lot of factors play into whether a statement can be considered defamatory and reputationally injurious enough to result in an award of damages.

 

[davidmcbeth3]

sure, why not?

 

[ENASNI]

sure, why not?

Agreed**************