How To Prove A Florida Qualified Privilege Defense
In Florida, a defense of Qualified Privilege is defined as:
A Qualified Privilege allows someone to make a statement that would otherwise be defamatory when the statement is made in good faith on a subject matter the person making it has both an interest and duty and made to another who has a corresponding duty. If the statement is made with actual malice, however, the qualified privilege no longer applies.
It simply means:
In some instances, a person is free to make a defamatory statement as long as there is no malice.
There are 5 elements of the defense:
- Element 1. A statement was made in good faith. A statement made in good faith means that the person sharing the information genuinely believed it to be true and had no intention to harm anyone, which can help protect them legally if the statement is later challenged.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The statement was made during a private conversation between two colleagues discussing workplace performance.
* The individual making the statement had a reasonable belief that the information was accurate based on prior experiences with the subject.
* The statement was intended to provide constructive feedback to help improve the recipient’s job performance.
* The speaker had no ulterior motive and did not stand to gain anything from making the statement.
* The context of the statement was a professional setting where open communication was encouraged for team development. - Element 2. The statement was made by a person who had an interest in the subject, or the subject was one in which the speaker had a duty to speak. A person can share information without facing legal consequences if they have a genuine interest in the topic or are required to discuss it, as this is part of a legal protection called Qualified Privilege.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The statement was made by an employee regarding a colleague’s performance, which the employee was required to report to management as part of their job duties.
* The speaker, a supervisor, provided feedback about an employee’s conduct during a mandatory performance review meeting.
* The statement was made by a teacher discussing a student’s behavior with the school’s administration, fulfilling their responsibility to ensure a safe learning environment.
* The speaker, a healthcare professional, reported a patient’s condition to a colleague to ensure proper treatment, as required by medical protocols.
* The statement was made during a board meeting where directors discussed a fellow director’s actions, fulfilling their duty to address potential conflicts of interest. - Element 3. There was a corresponding interest or duty in the listener or reader. That is, there was a valid reason for the information to be communicated to the listener based on their relationship or involvement in the matter. In simple terms, this means that the person receiving the information had a good reason to hear it, based on their connection or role in the situation, which helps protect the speaker from legal consequences for sharing that information.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The listener was a business partner directly involved in the transaction, making them entitled to receive relevant information about the matter.
* The reader was an employee responsible for compliance, necessitating access to the communicated information to fulfill their job duties.
* The listener was a legal advisor engaged in the case, requiring the information to provide informed counsel to their client.
* The reader was a stakeholder in the organization, with a vested interest in the outcome of the communicated information.
* The listener was a regulatory authority overseeing the matter, thus having a duty to be informed about relevant developments. - Element 4. The statement was made on a proper occasion. The statement was made during a suitable event or situation, meaning it was appropriate for the context, which helps protect the speaker from legal consequences in cases of defamation, as it shows the statement was made with a legitimate purpose.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The statement was made during a company meeting where employee performance was being discussed, making it relevant to the context.
* The communication occurred in a private setting between two colleagues who had a professional duty to discuss the matter.
* The statement was shared in a written report intended for management review, ensuring it was appropriate for the audience.
* The discussion took place in the context of a formal investigation into workplace conduct, aligning with the need for transparency.
* The statement was made in response to a direct inquiry from a supervisor regarding the employee’s behavior, establishing a legitimate purpose. - Element 5. The statement was published in a proper manner. A statement is considered to have qualified privilege if it is shared in a proper way, meaning it was communicated responsibly and appropriately, often in a context where the speaker has a duty to share the information or the audience has a right to hear it.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The statement was shared in a private meeting attended only by relevant parties who had a legitimate interest in the information.
* The publication occurred in a professional context, where the speaker had a duty to communicate the information to the audience.
* The statement was disseminated through official channels, such as company emails or internal reports, ensuring it reached the appropriate recipients.
* The information was presented in a factual manner, without embellishment or malicious intent, to maintain professionalism.
* The speaker had a reasonable belief that the audience needed the information to make informed decisions related to their roles.
(See Thomas v. Tampa Bay Downs, Inc., 761 So. 2d 401 – Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 2nd Dist. 2000. American Ideal Management v. Dale Village, 567 So.2d 497 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Lundquist v. Alewine, 397 So.2d 1148 (Fla. 5th D.C.A. 1981).)
If you’re in court without a lawyer and plan to assert a Defense of Qualified Privilege, it’s essential to engage in a Personal Practice of Law. 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. Courtroom5 can help you navigate this process effectively.
Prove Your FL Qualified Privilege Defense
U.S. Civil Cases Only