Could my former employer sue me for libel?

[claycad82]

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

I turned my (former) employer in for insurance fraud after I found fraudulent invoices, profit and loss reports, and inventory that he submitted to the insurance company after a fire.

I photographed the real invoices for the replacement equipment and real P&L reports so the insurance company could compare them with the fraudulent invoices he'd submitted to them. I couldn't find a complete listing of our actual inventory, but assured the insurance company that getting subpoenas for our supplier's records and bank statements could verify my accusations were true.

I realize these investigations take some time, but it's been nearly a year, and nothing.

I intend on writing an open letter to the insurance company questioning why no arrest has been made. I would detail my accusations along with the evidence I provided them. I would post this open letter to a website www dot arrest(his name here) dot com. I would forward that link to all of his customers, business affiliates, local reporters, friends and family.

What would be the chances of a successful suit for libel in a case such as this?

Would the burden be on me to prove my accusations or would they be on him to disprove my accusations?

I feel that my accusations are made with a reasonable belief that they are true given the evidence I have found.

I also feel the matter would be of public interest. His many customers and local community have a right to know the kind of nefarious person they may be conducting business with.

Even if he happened to file and win a libel case against me, but was later down the road arrested and found guilty of the charges, could the case be overturned or could I file a counter suit against him at that time?

 

[Proserpina]

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

I turned my (former) employer in for insurance fraud after I found fraudulent invoices, profit and loss reports, and inventory that he submitted to the insurance company after a fire.

I photographed the real invoices for the replacement equipment and real P&L reports so the insurance company could compare them with the fraudulent invoices he'd submitted to them. I couldn't find a complete listing of our actual inventory, but assured the insurance company that getting subpoenas for our supplier's records and bank statements could verify my accusations were true.

I realize these investigations take some time, but it's been nearly a year, and nothing.

I intend on writing an open letter to the insurance company questioning why no arrest has been made. I would detail my accusations along with the evidence I provided them. I would post this open letter to a website www dot arrest(his name here) dot com. I would forward that link to all of his customers, business affiliates, local reporters, friends and family.

What would be the chances of a successful suit for libel in a case such as this?

Would the burden be on me to prove my accusations or would they be on him to disprove my accusations?

I feel that my accusations are made with a reasonable belief that they are true given the evidence I have found.

I also feel the matter would be of public interest. His many customers and local community have a right to know the kind of nefarious person they may be conducting business with.

Even if he happened to file and win a libel case against me, but was later down the road arrested and found guilty of the charges, could the case be overturned or could I file a counter suit against him at that time?

Why do you believe you are owed an explanation?

Let's start there.

 

[claycad82]

Why do you believe you are owed an explanation?

Let's start there.

It's more about bringing the situation to the attention of his customers and local community. It's an open letter, I don't expect a response from the insurance company. I suppose I could just email a detailed explanation to his customers and local community, but filing an open letter just seemed a more civil route. Plus it is a bit of a protest against my former employer and the insurance company. Based on my discussion with the investigator, they have suspected him of fraudulent activities and seemed to have substantial evidence against him prior to me even reporting him, so why do they continue to allow him to get away with it? He is a criminal, they know it, arrest him already.

My motives aside, my question was would he have a valid case for libel in such a situation?

 

[quincy]

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

I turned my (former) employer in for insurance fraud after I found fraudulent invoices, profit and loss reports, and inventory that he submitted to the insurance company after a fire.

I photographed the real invoices for the replacement equipment and real P&L reports so the insurance company could compare them with the fraudulent invoices he'd submitted to them. I couldn't find a complete listing of our actual inventory, but assured the insurance company that getting subpoenas for our supplier's records and bank statements could verify my accusations were true.

I realize these investigations take some time, but it's been nearly a year, and nothing.

I intend on writing an open letter to the insurance company questioning why no arrest has been made. I would detail my accusations along with the evidence I provided them. I would post this open letter to a website www dot arrest(his name here) dot com. I would forward that link to all of his customers, business affiliates, local reporters, friends and family.

This is a VERY bad idea. Let the investigators do their investigating. You should not publicly accuse your former employer of any criminal act until you are able to prove for a fact he did anything criminal (an arrest, a conviction), unless you are looking to be sued for defamation.

What would be the chances of a successful suit for libel in a case such as this?

I don't know. All facts would need to be known before the odds of success could be guessed at - but they are not zero.

Would the burden be on me to prove my accusations or would they be on him to disprove my accusations?

The employer would have to show that defamatory statements were made about him and you made the statements. You would then need to prove that the statements were either not defamatory, were true, were an opinion.

I feel that my accusations are made with a reasonable belief that they are true given the evidence I have found.

I also feel the matter would be of public interest. His many customers and local community have a right to know the kind of nefarious person they may be conducting business with.

I recommend you wait until your employer has been arrested and convicted of a crime before you make any statements that can injure his reputation.

Even if he happened to file and win a libel case against me, but was later down the road arrested and found guilty of the charges, could the case be overturned or could I file a counter suit against him at that time?

If your former employer filed a defamation suit against you and was successful in showing you defamed him, you would probably not have any money left to file a suit against him.

 

[Zigner]

It's more about bringing the situation to the attention of his customers and local community. It's an open letter, I don't expect a response from the insurance company. I suppose I could just email a detailed explanation to his customers and local community, but filing an open letter just seemed a more civil route. Plus it is a bit of a protest against my former employer and the insurance company. Based on my discussion with the investigator, they have suspected him of fraudulent activities and seemed to have substantial evidence against him prior to me even reporting him, so why do they continue to allow him to get away with it? He is a criminal, they know it, arrest him already.

My motives aside, my question was would he have a valid case for libel in such a situation?

You are not entitled to know the results.
They don't have to arrest him.
You could definitely be sued.

Move along now...

 

[claycad82]

This is a VERY bad idea. Let the investigators do their investigating. You should not publicly accuse your former employer of any criminal act until you are able to prove for a fact he did anything criminal (an arrest, a conviction), unless you are looking to be sued for defamation.



I don't know. All facts would need to be known before the odds of success could be guessed at - but they are not zero.



The employer would have to show that defamatory statements were made about him and you made the statements. You would then need to prove that the statements were either not defamatory, were true, were an opinion.



I recommend you wait until your employer has been arrested and convicted of a crime before you make any statements that can injure his reputation.



If your former employer filed a defamation suit against you and was successful in showing you defamed him, you would probably not have any money left to file a suit against him.

Thank you for such a detailed response.

 

[claycad82]

You are not entitled to know the results.
They don't have to arrest him.
You could definitely be sued.

Move along now...

I never claimed to be entitled to know the results. I plainly said I didn't expect a response from the insurance company.

I know they don't have to arrest him, but what does that say about committing insurance fraud? I gave them pretty substantial evidence and said I was more than willing to testify in court. They seemed to already have an investigation underway and evidence against him prior to my report. This is a major insurance company with the financial resources to investigate the matter thoroughly. I just can't imagine why they haven't already wrapped up their investigation and made an example out of this guy?

 

[quincy]

Thank you for such a detailed response.

You're welcome, claycad82.

But I should probably add a few things.

You are able to appeal any defamation award, should the employer be successful in his suit against you. Judgments can be reversed.

When you falsely accuse someone of a crime, the person defamed does not have to prove his reputation has been harmed. A false accusation of a crimes is (generally) judged defamation per se and harm to one's reputation is presumed. Damages can be awarded on this presumed injury alone.

There is a one year statute of limitations on defamation claims in West Virginia, which means that the former employer would need to file suit against you within one year from the date you first published the defamatory statements.

If your employer can be considered a public figure, you might have an additional defense to the publication of the statements, but the defense does not prevent the lawsuit from being filed against you and it will not necessarily prevent a lawsuit loss.

Finally, making public statements about what you learned about your former employer could interfere with the investigator's investigation - making the investigator's job more difficult. I would let him do his job and then, if your employer is arrested and convicted of insurance fraud, you can speak out to others.

 

[Proserpina]

I'd also add that it could very well damage future employment options.

 

[quincy]

I'd also add that it could very well damage future employment options.

Right. Prospective employers tend to avoid hiring those who have publicly defamed their previous employers.

 

[claycad82]

You're welcome, claycad82.

But I should probably add a few things.

You are able to appeal any defamation award, should the employer be successful in his suit against you. Judgments can be reversed.

When you falsely accuse someone of a crime, the person defamed does not have to prove his reputation has been harmed. A false accusation of a crimes is (generally) judged defamation per se and harm to one's reputation is presumed. Damages can be awarded on this presumed injury alone.

There is a one year statute of limitations on defamation claims in West Virginia, which means that the former employer would need to file suit against you within one year from the date you first published the defamatory statements.

If your employer can be considered a public figure, you might have an additional defense to the publication of the statements, but the defense does not prevent the lawsuit from being filed against you and it will not necessarily prevent a lawsuit loss.

Finally, making public statements about what you learned about your former employer could interfere with the investigator's investigation - making the investigator's job more difficult. I would let him do his job and then, if your employer is arrested and convicted of insurance fraud, you can speak out to others.

I told my employer that I was turning him in when I left the job...in hindsight not a good idea. I let the investigators know that I told him. So really I don't see how everybody else knowing could alter the investigation. My employer would have had time to attempt to make any cover ups that were within his power.

I have asked others the question of how long something like this would take, and the only real answer I get is a long time, could be years even, but why? Again, this is a major company with the means to financially support a thorough investigation. My accusations are pretty serious and my evidence substantial. It could all easily be confirmed by getting invoices from our suppliers to compare to the fake ones he submitted and our bank statements to see what our actual income before the fire was, because it was way less then what he reported on the P&L statements he turned in.

I would imagine that the insurance companies apparent suspicions to begin with, the evidence I gave them and my testimony would be enough to easily get subpoenas.

To compare, I know of a guy who was caught stealing money from a non-profit he was treasurer of, he has already been arrested and his trial is only a few weeks away, and that has all been in the same time frame as turning my employer in. And this guy stole way less money. I just do not understand the legal system.

 

[cbg]

First, because yours is not the only investigation they are doing. There are only so many resources at any given time and only so much can go into any one investigation during that time, meaning it can get stretched out.

Second, arrest is not the only possible option. Fines are also a possibility. Since you freely admit you do not know or expect an explanation from the insurance company, what makes you think you'd know if the employer were fined instead of arrested? What makes you think you get to determine what action is taken?

 

[Proserpina]

I told my employer that I was turning him in when I left the job...in hindsight not a good idea. I let the investigators know that I told him. So really I don't see how everybody else knowing could alter the investigation. My employer would have had time to attempt to make any cover ups that were within his power.

I have asked others the question of how long something like this would take, and the only real answer I get is a long time, could be years even, but why? Again, this is a major company with the means to financially support a thorough investigation. My accusations are pretty serious and my evidence substantial. It could all easily be confirmed by getting invoices from our suppliers to compare to the fake ones he submitted and our bank statements to see what our actual income before the fire was, because it was way less then what he reported on the P&L statements he turned in.

I would imagine that the insurance companies apparent suspicions to begin with, the evidence I gave them and my testimony would be enough to easily get subpoenas.

To compare, I know of a guy who was caught stealing money from a non-profit he was treasurer of, he has already been arrested and his trial is only a few weeks away, and that has all been in the same time frame as turning my employer in. And this guy stole way less money. I just do not understand the legal system.

You don't know the circumstances of his, or anybody else's for that matter, investigation and/or arrest.

Some advice going forward: be VERY careful where you stick your nose. It might just get stung.

 

[eerelations]

What OP is planning to do is just about the clearest and most direct path to hell that I've ever seen. Really.

 

[quincy]

I told my employer that I was turning him in when I left the job...in hindsight not a good idea. I let the investigators know that I told him. So really I don't see how everybody else knowing could alter the investigation. My employer would have had time to attempt to make any cover ups that were within his power.

Accusing your former employer of insurance fraud is not defamation if you make this claim to him alone, even if your accusations turn out to be false, because defamation requires third party communication (someone other than the defamer and the defamed) for reputational injury to occur. There can be no successful defamation lawsuit.

Accusing your former employer of insurance fraud could be defamation if you make this claim to an insurance investigator because a third party (the investigator) is involved. If your accusation turns out to be false, however, there is a qualified privilege that attaches to reports of crimes or suspected crimes that are made to proper authorities in good faith and with the belief in the truth of what is reported. To defeat this qualified privilege, the one defamed would need to prove the statements were made with actual malice (with knowing falsity and an intent to harm). A successful defamation lawsuit becomes difficult because proving actual malice is difficult.

Accusing your former employer of insurance fraud would most likely be found defamatory (defamatory per se) if you make this claim to "everybody else" and the accusations are false (or cannot be proved true). Reputational injury is presumed with false accusations of crimes and damages can be awarded on this presumed injury. A successful defamation lawsuit is possible or even probable.

Falsely accusing your employer of insurance fraud to everybody else may or may not alter the insurance investigator's investigation (it might depend on if others were involved in the fraud) but it definitely alters the risk of a defamation lawsuit being filed against you.

I just do not understand the legal system.

A lot of people do not understand the legal system. That is why lawyers were made.