Exam 13: Defamation and Related Torts

What was the purpose of the Communications Decency Act of 1996?

Why is defamation a complex tort?

What is the single publication rule?

Why is it generally easier to prove libel than slander?

Special harm need not be shown in the case of slander.

Public officials must show that the defendant acted with malice or ill will before being able to recover for defamation.

All federal officials, and some state officials, have absolute immunity even when their statements are made outside the course and furtherance of their jobs.

A defendant cannot be strictly liable for a defamatory statement.

If the damages a plaintiff suffers are damages, he or she will not have to prove actual harm.

A plaintiff who has grounds to sue for false light may not necessarily have grounds to sue for defamation.

A murder suspect whose life history is published in the newspapers may have a claim for public disclosure of private facts.

Trade libel is similar to defamation except the defendant's statement need not ridicule or disgrace the plaintiff.

A statement is defamatory even if no one other than the plaintiff sees or hears it.

The literary context in which a statement is made is taken into consideration when deciding if a statement is fact or opinion.

Libel includes communications occurring in physical form, such as computer tapes.

A public official is one who has injected him- or herself into a public controversy.

Defamation is complicated by the First Amendment concerns that have to be balanced against the individual's right to privacy.

Statements alleging that a plaintiff has engaged in criminal conduct fall under slander per se.

A statement must be subject to at least one reasonable interpretation that is defamatory before a plaintiff can recover for defamation.

The Uniform Correction or Clarification of Defamation Act protects media defendants but does nothing for plaintiffs.