Slander/defamation by ex-manager?

[Coastie08]

Hi, we are in Oregon and my husband was recently fired from his job after his manager lied and got him fired. He left and was told by his regional director that he would have to come up with some story on how he was fired, b/c they wouldn't tell anyone. He is fine telling the truth on how he was fired and by what lies.

A week ago we found out that the manager was calling other branches/offices and telling the lies and spinning stories against my husband to these former colleagues (he was contacted by one who was called by the ex-manager). We weren't so happy to hear about this, but, oh well, we're out of the corrupt environment and the people that the manager is trying to sway know my husband and know his charecter. The manager is supposed to keep thier mouth shut and not say anything, however we hear through the grapevine that it's not being enforced by corporate (my husband is still friends with several other managers and gets updates on the situation, sometimes wether he wants to or not).

Fast forward to today. He gets a call from an unemployment department official who has called his ex-manager in regards to him filing for unemployment. Instead of following procedure, and referring him to the corporate work line, the person tells the entire fabricated story, including throwing in more salacious and made up lies, including that he was partly fired for another offense, which isn't true at all, and we have record of.

The unemployment official is shocked, not about the story, but that this person said these things when there is usually more privacy/security in the workplace.

My husband called the corporate Advice & Counsel line and they told him that the manager was NOT allowed to say anything, let alone create more lies to tell to the unemployment official. They are opening an escalated (faster than usual) investigation because now that husband has an impartial third party that can testify to his harassment/slander/whateveryoucallit claims. He had submitted a letter a few week ago that says that the manager is in retalliation mode after he logged several of the person's offenses and submitted them to corporate. The manager was written up and told if they did anything like it again they would be fired. The next day the manager's claims came and DH was fired .

We're supposed to get a phone call tomorrow from Advice & Counsel and/or Legal, but I'm trying to get more information on what his options are. Would this be a case for defamation or whatever the proper term would be?
Thank you for any answers.

 

[quincy]

It certainly sounds like your husband is being slandered by this manager.

Any communication (written or oral) which exposes a person to contempt or ridicule or hatred, or lowers them in the esteem of others, or causes them to be shunned, or injures them in their business or calling, is defamation. There are five conditions necessary in order to bring a successful defamation action against someone.

One condition is that the defamatory comment must be made to someone other than the person being defamed and, in your husband's case, it seems that his ex-manager is freely spreading the lies about your husband to others. For slander, "witness" testimony is necessary - someone who heard the manager tell the lies about your husband would be needed to prove what was said.

Another condition is that the person defamed must be identified - and, again, the manager is specifically naming your husband.

The comments made must be defamatory - the words written (libel) or spoken (slander) must injure a reputation or, in some circumstances, cause emotional distress so severe that it requires medical treatment. Most defamation cases occur because someone has been falsely accused of a crime or of moral failings or incompetence in his trade or profession. Truth, no matter how damaging to a reputation, is not defamation.

Another condition that must be demonstrated in any defamation action is "fault" - for an ordinary person (not a public figure) that means showing that the defamatory comments made were made without due care. It seems, from what you have posted, that the manager has ignored the advice to stay silent on the manner of your husband's leaving the company, which could indicate fault. In absence of some evidence of fault, or that the words spoken or written were done so with negligence, then you cannot hope to win a defamation suit.

Finally, there must be a demonstrated loss or reputational injury of some kind. This can be a monetary loss (from loss of a job or loss of a promotion or loss of clients, as examples), or an impairment in the person's standing in the community, personal humiliation, or mental anguish and suffering. If your husband lost his job because of the lies told by the manager, that can demonstrate injury.

The manager's defenses to any slander actions brought, or the ones I can see he could potentially use, could be truth, opinion or fair comment and criticism.

I would wait to see what the corporate Advice and Counsel says, then contact an attorney for advice and direction on a defamation suit, to see if one is worth pursuing. They are extremely expensive to bring, time-consuming, and there is never a guarantee of a win.

Good luck.

 

[Coastie08]

Thank you for your response. I heard a bit of husband's phone call with Advice & Counsel this morning. It looks as though the manager is claiming ignorance. There are several things wrong with that line of defense, 1) that person has been in management for 2 years and has hired and fired and knows hiring/firing procedure very well, 2) person was told by regional to not say anything so hubby would have to come up with his own response as to why he was fired and 3) the person created a new lie as to partly why husband was fired and told it to the unemployment official. this is easily proved as hubby has his personnel file and also the phone call with the unemployment official.

It's so convoluted. What would you think if the corporation claimed manager ignorance?

 

[quincy]

Ignorance is not much of a defense against violations of company policy, and it certainly doesn't fly very well in court over violations of law.

In other words, while it can certainly be argued that the manager was ignorant (and that would be a point, it seems, easily made by both the prosecution and the defense), if the manager and/or the corporation try to claim they didn't know that what was said was defamatory, it doesn't make the comments less defamatory or a reputation less injured by the comments made.

The condition of defamation that they seem to be concentrating a defense on is the "fault" condition. In determining liability, any conduct is measured against what a reasonably prudent person would, or would not, have done under the same or similar circumstances. This is the "negligence" proof that must be demonstrated and this is perhaps the trickiest area of defamation law. Telling lies, however, that are known to be lies, or telling lies that may be believed to be true but with no reasonable grounds for that belief, demonstrates negligence.

I would speak with an attorney in Oregon.