Libel Question...

[Prandelli]

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

A friend of mine posted on facebook that a gentleman was the most dishonest person they know, they made this claim after some business dealings where dishonestly handled by the accused. Anyway the person who was accused of being dishonest is threatening a libel suit, is that legit? Can they do that?

 

[Proserpina]

Yes, they can.

Whether or not such a suit would be successful would depend on several factors, not least of which is the question of the person being able to prove tangible damages to his business directly related to what the Facebook message/status said.

Then you have the problem of "opinion" versus "fact".

Defamation suits are terribly expensive in terms of both time and money (think 4-6 years and at least $60k) to litigate; chances are this person is simply blowing smoke.

If the author of the comment is actually served with a lawsuit, s/he absolutely needs to contact an attorney asap; even without basis for a suit these can be terrifically expensive to defend.

 

[Prandelli]

If the person who claims to have been defamed sent an equally defaming email to an individual who knows both parties, is that a defence?

The person who is claiming defamation is a bit of a public figure who lost his business due to disparaging comments about people who where killed in an accident.

 

[swalsh411]

Look. Nobody can advise you unless you clearly state what happened and who allegedly said what. Talking in generalities is a waste of time.

 

[Proserpina]

If the person who claims to have been defamed sent an equally defaming email to an individual who knows both parties, is that a defence?

Tit-for-tat responses are not a defense.

Would you care to be a bit more specific?

The person who is claiming defamation is a bit of a public figure who lost his business due to disparaging comments about people who where killed in an accident.

Was it the public figure who was making the disparaging comments?

Your post is quite vague.

 

[Prandelli]

I apologise for the ambiguity.

Basically John did business with steven, john had a very bad experience and felt steven was dishonest, John posted a comment on facebook that steven was dishonest which is his genuine sentiment.

Steven saw the comment and threatened John with a libel suit, Steven emailed a consumer of Johns claiming John was a liar.

Steven says it isnt libel because what he said is in an email and not public, steven previously lost most of the commercial value of his business as he was dropped by a number of sponsors for disgraceful comments about people who where killed in an accident. I bring this up because, wouldnt it be hard to allege damage to your business when it was already severely damaged?

 

[swalsh411]

A person lost most of their business because of one facebook comment? I don't buy that for a second.

 

[quincy]

None of what you have posted so far appears enough to support defamation suits by either Steven or John, but a California attorney could review all of the facts to determine this better.

There would need to be a review of the Facebook page written by John, to see what exactly was written about Steven and his business, and there would need to be a review of the email, to see what exactly was written by Steven about John, and there would need to be a review of all of the facts that led to the defamatory exchanges, and a review of the claimed reputational injuries suffered as a result of the defamatory statements.

Steven is wrong that the contents of an email cannot be the basis of a defamation suit - if an email contains defamatory statements about someone other than the person to whom the email is sent, that is enough to cause reputational injury and potentially support a suit against the emailer.

Being called a "liar" is generally not defamatory. It is just not a very nice thing to call someone. Again, however, a review of the facts would be needed to determine if this "liar statement," taken in context of what else was said, could be seen as defamation. This would be true also for calling someone "dishonest." These are words that need to be seen in context in order to determine their defamatory nature.

As for your last comment, yes, it is difficult to prove a defamatory statement led to reputational injury if the source of the reputational injury can be equally attributed to something else. Steven the business owner would also need to prove that the statements made by John on his Facebook page were made with actual malice if, as you mention, Steven can be seen as a public figure (public figure status is determined by the court).

California has a one year statute of limitations on defamation suits, the time within which a suit must be filed after first publication of the defamatory statement. If either Steven or John are interested in pursuing a defamation suit against the other, then they should consult with an attorney in their area.

Re-read Proserpina's posts for some of the proofs necessary for an action, a good indication of costs and times that can be involved in such an action, and good advice.