How To Prove A Florida Defamation – Libel Claim
In Florida, a claim of Defamation – Libel is defined as:
Libel refers to a false and unauthorized written communication that harms a person’s reputation by subjecting them to distrust, hatred, contempt, ridicule, or avoidance. It includes communications that has the potential to harm a person in their profession.
It simply means:
An untrue written public statement designed to damage someone’s reputation.
There are 5 elements of the claim:
- Element 1. The defendant published a false and defamatory written statement of and concerning the plaintiff. The defendant made a false written statement that harmed the plaintiff’s reputation, clearly identifying the plaintiff and damaging their good name.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant published an article that falsely claimed the plaintiff embezzled funds from their employer.
* The written statement included specific allegations about the plaintiff’s character that were proven to be untrue.
* The defendant failed to verify the accuracy of the information before publishing it, demonstrating negligence.
* The publication reached a wide audience, causing significant harm to the plaintiff’s reputation.
* The defendant acknowledged that the information was incorrect but refused to retract the statement. - Element 2. The plaintiff was a private citizen at the time the statement was made. In a defamation case, the plaintiff must be a private individual when the harmful statement was made, meaning they are not a public figure or official, which affects how the law views their claim and the burden of proof they must meet.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The plaintiff was not a public figure or official, and had no prior involvement in public controversies.
* At the time the statement was made, the plaintiff was engaged in private business activities unrelated to any public interest.
* The plaintiff had not voluntarily injected themselves into any public debate or discussion prior to the statement being made.
* The plaintiff’s social media presence was limited to personal interactions, with no indication of seeking public attention or notoriety.
* The plaintiff did not hold any elected office or position that would categorize them as a public figure at the time of the statement. - Element 3. The defendant made the statement without reasonable care as to its truthfulness or falsity. This means the person who made the statement didn’t take the time or effort to check if what they said was true or false, showing a lack of responsibility in ensuring their words were accurate before sharing them.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant failed to verify the accuracy of the information before publishing it, despite having access to reliable sources.
* The defendant ignored clear evidence that contradicted the statement, choosing instead to rely on unverified hearsay.
* The defendant had a history of making similar unsubstantiated claims, indicating a pattern of negligence regarding truthfulness.
* The defendant did not consult any experts or credible witnesses who could have provided accurate information about the subject matter.
* The defendant published the statement despite receiving warnings from others about its potential inaccuracy. - Element 4. The statement was without privilege. In a defamation case, saying “the statement was without privilege” means that the person making the statement had no special legal protection to say it, which is important because it helps determine if the statement can be considered harmful and false.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant made the statement publicly and without any prior relationship to the plaintiff that would justify the disclosure.
* The statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth.
* The defendant had no legal obligation to disclose the information to any third party.
* The statement was not made in the context of a judicial or legislative proceeding, where privilege might apply.
* The defendant did not seek or obtain consent from the plaintiff before making the statement. - Element 5. The plaintiff suffered actual damages as a result of the defendant’s statement. The plaintiff experienced real harm, like lost income or emotional distress, because of false statements made by the defendant, which is a key part of proving a defamation case.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The plaintiff lost their job after the defendant falsely claimed they engaged in unethical behavior at work.
* The plaintiff’s reputation in the community suffered, leading to social isolation and distress.
* The plaintiff incurred medical expenses for therapy to address anxiety and depression caused by the defendant’s statements.
* The plaintiff experienced a significant decrease in business revenue after the defendant’s defamatory remarks were published.
* The plaintiff was unable to secure new clients due to the negative perception created by the defendant’s statements.
(See Thomas v. Jacksonville Television, Inc., 699 So. 2d 800 – Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 1st Dist. 1997.)
If you’re in court without a lawyer and plan to assert a Claim of Defamation – Libel, having a Personal Practice of Law at Courtroom5 is essential. You’ll need to make informed decisions about what to file at each phase of your case and prepare legal documents supported by thorough legal research and a strong analysis of the facts. Equip yourself with the tools and knowledge to navigate your Defamation – Libel claim effectively.
Prove Your FL Defamation – Libel Claim
U.S. Civil Cases Only