A form of publication which tends to cause one to lose the esteem of the community is defamation. This is injury to reputation. A person can be held liable for the defamation of another. In order to prove defamation, the plaintiff must prove:
- that a statement was made about the plaintiff's reputation, honesty or integrity that is not true;
- publication to a third party (i.e., another person hears or reads the statement); and
- the plaintiff suffers damages as a result of the statement.
Slander is a form of defamation that consists of making false oral statements about a person which would damage that person's reputation. If one spreads a rumor that his neighbor has been in jail and this is not true, the person making such false statements could be held liable for slander.
Defamation which occurs by written statements is known as libel. Libel also may result from a picture or visual representation. Truth is an absolute defense to slander or libel.
Some statements, while libelous or slanderous, are absolutely privileged in the sense that the statements can be made without fear of a lawsuit for slander. The best example is statements made in a court of law. An untrue statement made about a person in court which damages that person's reputation will generally not cause liability to the speaker as far as slander is concerned. However, if the statement is untrue, the person making it may be liable for criminal perjury.
If a communication is made in good faith on a subject in which the party communicating it has a legitimate right or interest in communicating it, this communication may be exempt from slander liability due to a qualified privileged.
The following form letter demands that someone cease making libelous or slanderous statements, or appropriate legal action will be taken.
Defamation Of Character Examples In Phoenix
Category:
State:
Multi-State
City:
Phoenix
Control #:
US-00423BG
Format:
Word;
Rich Text
Instant download
Description
Form popularity
FAQ
Guarding against defamatory statements Be truthful. If your statements are true, they are not defamatory. Be clear and unambiguous. Keep in mind that statements that are technically true may still be defamatory if they are incomplete or misleading.
In Arizona, the elements of a defamation claim are: a false statement concerning the plaintiff; the statement was defamatory; the statement was published to a third party; the requisite fault on the part of the defendant; and. the plaintiff was damaged as a result of the statement.
Truth is the first, and easiest, defense to a defamation claim. As discussed in the elements of defamation, the statement about you must have been false. If a Defendant can show that the statements were true, or even substantially true, then they could defeat a claim for defamation.
Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) §13-3506.01 outlines criminal defamation. It's defined as making a false and malicious statement about another person that exposes them to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or which impairs their business.
There must be a publication of the defamatory statement, that is to say, it must be communicated to some person other than the plaintiff himself. In case of slander, either there must be proof of special damages or the slander must come within the serious classes of cases in which it is actionable per se.
Truth, or substantial truth, is a complete defense to a claim of defamation.
Per Se and Per Quod Defamation in Arizona Arizona recognizes both per se slander and libel, in addition to per quod slander and libel. Per se is a legal standard in which damage is presumed, whereas per quod, is when the plaintiff must prove the damages caused by the defamatory act.
The amount one can sue for defamation varies widely based on several factors including the severity and extent of damage caused by the defamatory statement. However, damages typically range from thousands to millions of dollars depending on circumstances such as loss earnings and emotional distress.
To establish a claim for false light invasion of privacy, “a plaintiff must show (1) the defendant, with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth, gave publicity to information placing the plaintiff in a false light, and (2) the false light in which the plaintiff was placed would be highly offensive to ...
