How To Prove A Texas Defamation – Slander Per Se Claim
In Texas, a claim of Defamation – Slander Per Se is defined as:
Slander occurs when, by way of oral or spoken communication, one makes a defamatory, malicious or false statement about another that damages their reputation and subjects them to hatred, contempt, or ridicule.
It simply means:
A public untrue statement that damages someone’s reputation.
There are 6 elements of the claim:
- Element 1. The defendant made an oral statement. The defendant spoke out loud in a way that harmed the reputation of the plaintiff, making a statement that was damaging and false, which is a key part of a slander claim.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant publicly stated that the plaintiff was involved in criminal activity during a community meeting.
* The defendant told several coworkers that the plaintiff was dishonest and untrustworthy in their professional dealings.
* The defendant claimed in a social media post that the plaintiff had been fired for theft from their previous employer.
* The defendant repeatedly accused the plaintiff of being a fraud in front of mutual friends at a gathering.
* The defendant asserted in a podcast that the plaintiff had a history of cheating in business transactions. - Element 2. The statement was false. In a defamation case, “the statement was false” means that the harmful statement made about someone is not true, which is essential for proving that the person’s reputation was unfairly damaged by what was said.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant publicly claimed that the plaintiff had been convicted of a felony, which is untrue and can be verified through court records.
* The statement made by the defendant suggested that the plaintiff was involved in illegal drug activities, which the plaintiff has never engaged in.
* The defendant asserted that the plaintiff was fired from their job for theft, while the plaintiff voluntarily resigned without any allegations of misconduct.
* The defendant alleged that the plaintiff had a history of mental illness, which is false and not supported by any medical documentation.
* The statement indicated that the plaintiff was a registered sex offender, which is categorically false and can be disproven by public records. - Element 3. The statement was made to a third person. In a defamation case for slander per se, the statement must have been spoken to someone other than the person being accused, meaning it was shared with a third party who heard or received the harmful remark.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant publicly accused the plaintiff of theft during a community meeting attended by several residents.
* The defendant shared false information about the plaintiff’s character in a group chat that included multiple acquaintances.
* The defendant made derogatory remarks about the plaintiff’s professional conduct in front of colleagues at a work event.
* The defendant posted defamatory statements about the plaintiff on social media, where numerous followers could see the comments.
* The defendant told a mutual friend that the plaintiff was dishonest, which was then relayed to others in their social circle. - Element 4. The statement referred to an ascertainable person. In a defamation case, particularly for slander per se, the statement must clearly refer to a specific person, meaning it should be identifiable to others as being about that individual, which can harm their reputation.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The statement explicitly named John Doe, a well-known local business owner, making it clear who was being referred to.
* The context of the statement included specific details about Jane Smith’s actions, which are only known to her and a small group of acquaintances.
* The statement was made during a public meeting where only a few individuals were present, all of whom could identify the person being discussed.
* The statement included unique identifiers, such as the person’s occupation and location, making it easy for others to ascertain who was being referenced.
* The statement was published in a community newsletter that specifically targeted residents familiar with the individual in question. - Element 5. The statement was not protected by a qualified or conditional privilege, The statement in question was not shielded by any legal protections that typically allow certain comments to be made without fear of defamation, meaning it could be considered harmful and false, leading to a potential slander claim.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The statement was made with actual malice, as the speaker knew it was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.
* The statement was not made in a context that warranted protection, such as a private conversation or a formal report.
* The speaker had a personal vendetta against the subject, indicating a lack of good faith in making the statement.
* The statement was disseminated to individuals outside of a privileged context, such as sharing it on social media.
* The content of the statement was inherently damaging and not related to any legitimate public interest or concern. - Element 6. The statement (a) injured a person in his or her office, profession, or occupation; (b) charged a person with the commission of a crime; or (c) imputed to a person a loathsome disease. A defamation claim for slander per se occurs when someone makes a false statement that harms another person’s job, accuses them of a crime, or suggests they have a serious disease, which can damage their reputation without needing further proof of harm.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant publicly accused the plaintiff of embezzling funds from their employer, damaging the plaintiff’s professional reputation.
* The defendant claimed that the plaintiff was under investigation for theft, leading to the plaintiff’s suspension from work.
* The defendant stated that the plaintiff had a contagious disease, causing colleagues to avoid interaction with the plaintiff.
* The defendant alleged that the plaintiff was involved in criminal activities, resulting in the loss of clients and business opportunities.
* The defendant spread rumors that the plaintiff had been arrested for drug possession, severely impacting the plaintiff’s career prospects.
(See Guzman v. Sorola, Tex: Court of Appeals, 13th Dist. 2022. Reeves v. Western Co. of North America, 867 SW 2d 385 – Tex: Court of Appeals, 4th Dist. 1993.)
If you’re in court without a lawyer and plan to assert a Claim of Defamation – Slander Per Se, having a Personal Practice of Law at Courtroom5 is essential. You’ll need to make critical decisions about what to file at each phase of your case and prepare legal documents that are supported by thorough legal research and a strong analysis of the facts. Equip yourself with the tools and knowledge to navigate your case effectively.
Prove Your TX Defamation – Slander Per Se Claim
U.S. Civil Cases Only