Alex Jones Defamation case over 1.4+ BILLION. New case law or existing? What actual damages case?

[TheBlade]

New York.

I am considering filing a defamation suit because someone has sent their conspiracy theories about me to various 3rd parties.

I was under the impression I had to prove actual economic money damages. Sort of like saying as a result of the defamation, you got fired from your job or a restaurant you owned made $200,000 less cause of a faked yelp review. Traditionally difficult things to prove however the Alex Jones defamation case I don't believe the plaintiff had any economic damages as a result the statements about the attacks being a false flag since almost no one took the statements seriously. I don't think anyone lost their job or was not hired as a result of it. So before punitive damages on the 1.4+ Billion, its $965 Million somehow from the damage. I am wondering how this is being calculated\

I would like to know if I can follow this same legal model or is this was more of a 1 time deal that can never repeat. I think due to case law you are allowed to at least reference it in future filings to sort of follow in their footsteps.

 

[adjusterjack]

I was under the impression I had to prove actual economic money damages. Sort of like saying as a result of the defamation, you got fired from your job or a restaurant you owned made $200,000 less cause of a faked yelp review.

There's a doctrine called "defamation per se."

Read about it at these sources.

ny defamation per se at DuckDuckGo

Whether it applies to you is impossible to predict.

I would like to know if I can follow this same legal model or is this was more of a 1 time deal that can never repeat.

Beats me. Ask a defamation attorney.

I think due to case law you are allowed to at least reference it in future filings to sort of follow in their footsteps.

You can cite case decisions that have a bearing on yours.

Whether the Jones decision will or won't is anybody's guess.

Ask an attorney with whom you can discuss all of the elements of your case.

 

[doucar]

In your initial pleading you do not cite case decisions, you would cite them in opposition filing to a motion to dismiss or a demurrer

 

[Taxing Matters]

New York.

I am considering filing a defamation suit because someone has sent their conspiracy theories about me to various 3rd parties.

First thing to consider is that defamation is communicating a false statement of fact to a third person. Opinions are not facts, so if the material was simply opinion there is no defamation to be had. A lot of statements are a mix of fact and opinion, which then the jury would have to sort out whether any of the claimed facts are false. The next thing to remember is that defamation is a tort that involves injury to your reputation.

I was under the impression I had to prove actual economic money damages.

In most states, a distinction is made between defamation per se and defamation per quod. If the statement is defamation per se then the damage to reputation is presumed and the jury just needs to decide appropriate damages. But defamation per se requires that the false statement made about you falls into one of a narrow set of statements. There are typically four such statements, communicating to another:

• that you engaged in a serious crime;
• that you have a loathsome disease;
• that injures your business reputation; or
• that you are unchaste.

If the statement falls into one of those four categories then there need not be any proof of actual damages. Outside of those limited statements, you have to show not only that your reputation was damaged but also prove actual damages. Some states have effectively erased the distinction between defamation per se and per quod and drop the requirement to prove actual damages entirely. So a lot depends on which state's law applies and exactly what was said about you.

Unless the applicable court rules limit in some what what amount of damages you can seek, you could put in your complaint any amount of damages. But stating damages in a complaint doesn't tell you anything about what the court will actually award you if you win your case. Most defamation cases are not easily proved and even when the jury finds there was defamation, the award the jury gives may end up being rather small, meaning you could spend more litigating it then you'd get out of it. And there is also the question of whether the defendants actually have sufficient assets to satisfy the judgment. As a result, defamation cases are not all that common. It's going to be the rare case that hits really big bucks on a defamation claim.

Consult with a defamation attorney or two and see what they think of your case. You probably can find lawyers will give you a free or low cost initial consultation and that's the best way to know what shot you have in pursuing this claim.

One other thing to consider: sometimes the defamation case gets known to a lot more people than the original alleged defamatory statement did. You might end up injuring your own reputation more if that happens. So consider that factor too before suing.

In the end, for most people who are not famous (whether locally or nationally) it's just not worthwhile to take the time and expense of pursuing a defamation case. It can be better to just let it go and let those statements fade away rather than rehashing it for years while trying to win a defamation claim.

 

[quincy]

New York.

I am considering filing a defamation suit because someone has sent their conspiracy theories about me to various 3rd parties.

I was under the impression I had to prove actual economic money damages. Sort of like saying as a result of the defamation, you got fired from your job or a restaurant you owned made $200,000 less cause of a faked yelp review. Traditionally difficult things to prove however the Alex Jones defamation case I don't believe the plaintiff had any economic damages as a result the statements about the attacks being a false flag since almost no one took the statements seriously. I don't think anyone lost their job or was not hired as a result of it. So before punitive damages on the 1.4+ Billion, its $965 Million somehow from the damage. I am wondering how this is being calculated\

I would like to know if I can follow this same legal model or is this was more of a 1 time deal that can never repeat. I think due to case law you are allowed to at least reference it in future filings to sort of follow in their footsteps.

For a defamation claim to be successful, you do not have to prove economic injury. You do, however, need to show that your reputation has been injured.

Defamation is communication which exposes a person to hatred, ridicule or contempt, or lowers a person in the esteem of others, or causes the person to be shunned, or injures the person in their trade, occupation or profession.

The necessary conditions for a defamation claim are that statements are published to a third party about an identified or identifiable person, the statements are false, the statements are communicated with the requisite degree of fault, and demonstrable injury to the person’s reputation results.

Injury to one’s reputation may or may not be in the form of actual economic losses. Actual injury includes out-of-pocket money losses but also can includes damage to the esteem or social standing in which one is held, or damage to the reputation through words that impute one has a “loathsome” disease, or through humiliation, ridicule, mental anguish and suffering.

Are you a public figure? Where are the falsehoods published? Who are the third parties?

 

[quincy]

Here for informational purposes is a link to the Lafferty, et al v Alex Jones, et al Complaint that was filed by Sandy Hook families in May of 2018. This was just one of the suits filed against Jones.

https://www.documentscloud.org/documents/21579820-lafferty-v-alex-jones-sandy-hook-defamation-case

When you read through the Complaint, you might get a better idea of why the award of damages against Alex Jones were so high. You should also note that the lawsuit included five different counts, with only one of those counts for defamation and defamation per se (see page 34). Other counts were for invasion of privacy by false light (see page 33), intentional infliction of emotional distress (see page 35), negligent infliction of emotional distress (see page 36), and violations of Connecticut’s Unfair Trade Practices Act (see page 37).

 

[Taxing Matters]

Injury to one’s reputation may or may not be in the form of actual economic losses. Actual injury includes out-of-pocket money losses but also can includes damage to the esteem or social standing in which one is held, or damage to the reputation through words that impute one has a “loathsome” disease, or through humiliation, ridicule, mental anguish and suffering.

That's a significant feature of defamation that I didn't really touch on at all. Some torts require economic losses; this isn't one of them.

Are you a public figure? Where are the falsehoods published? Who are the third parties?

To TheBlade: quincy's questions are good ones, just want to remind you not to use real names of people/companies if you reply.

 

[quincy]

Yes! Please do not use the real names of the third parties - just their relationship to you.

Additional note: In New York, the statute of limitations for defamation claims is one year from the date of first publication of the defamatory material. Any defamation suit that you consider, TheBlade, needs to be filed within this time.

As an aside on the Alex Jones’ cases: Jones has filed for bankruptcy but he should not be able to have the defamation judgments against him discharged. Defamation does not fall under bankruptcy’s Personal Injury Tort Exception in 28 USC section 157(b)(2)(B).

 

[Taxing Matters]

As an aside on the Alex Jones’ cases: Jones has filed for bankruptcy but he should not be able to have the defamation judgments against him discharged. Defamation does not fall under bankruptcy’s Personal Injury Tort Exception in 28 USC section 157(b)(2)(B).

Bankruptcy discharge for defamation claims is possible, though the standards applied for that differ among the federal appeals court. For example, the Ninth Circuit has held that discharge may apply to defamation judgments so long as the bankruptcy court does not find that the defamatory statements did not constitute a "willful and malicious" injury to the plaintiff. The Ninth Circuit discusses this standard in the case IN RE: Seth E. Sicroff.

 

[quincy]

Bankruptcy discharge for defamation claims is possible, though the standards applied for that differ among the federal appeals court. For example, the Ninth Circuit has held that discharge may apply to defamation judgments so long as the bankruptcy court does not find that the defamatory statements did not constitute a "willful and malicious" injury to the plaintiff. The Ninth Circuit discusses this standard in the case IN RE: Seth E. Sicroff.

“Willful and malicious” is the key.

 

[zddoodah]

I would like to know if I can follow this same legal model or is this was more of a 1 time deal that can never repeat.

I have no idea. I'm not familiar with the case you mentioned, and you've told us virtually nothing about the facts of your case. You'll need to consult with an attorney in your state who handles defamation cases. Keep in mind that, the more novel your theory of recovery, the less likely you'll find an attorney willing to take your case on contingency, which means you'll need to pay a retainer against fees, and I'd guess that'll be at least $10-20k.

I think due to case law you are allowed to at least reference it in future filings to sort of follow in their footsteps.

If there is a published decision in your jurisdiction, you can rely on it as authority. If the case is not published, then it is not binding authority. If the case is from another jurisdiction, then it is, at best, persuasive authority. Also, New York publishes some trial level rulings, and those aren't binding.

 

[quincy]

I have no idea. I'm not familiar with the case you mentioned, and you've told us virtually nothing about the facts of your case. You'll need to consult with an attorney in your state who handles defamation cases. Keep in mind that, the more novel your theory of recovery, the less likely you'll find an attorney willing to take your case on contingency, which means you'll need to pay a retainer against fees, and I'd guess that'll be at least $10-20k.




If there is a published decision in your jurisdiction, you can rely on it as authority. If the case is not published, then it is not binding authority. If the case is from another jurisdiction, then it is, at best, persuasive authority. Also, New York publishes some trial level rulings, and those aren't binding.

You have not heard of the Sandy Hook/Alex Jones defamation cases ((Lafferty et al v Jones, Pozner v Jones, Sherlach v Jones, Heslin v Jones)?

How did you ever manage to escape seeing headlines for the last five years?

As a note: Defamation cases are rarely taken on a contingency basis unless, as would be the case with someone like Alex Jones, the plaintiffs or defendants are well-known figures.