Defamation per se

[Shebarb]

WHERE is it all in your post?

My mistake and my apologies. I had trouble since I was using a mobile device and was not aware of problems because of that. Quincy let me know why it was a problem. - Just in case, I could be mistaken, but if a relative of a situation is informed of something that is repeated by a so called witness, it IS considered a privilege or a person with a shared or common interest. If you dare read my entire post you will see what I am referring to. If you do not, I understand because it is indeed long and can be draining for someone to read.

 

[quincy]

My mistake and my apologies. I had trouble since I was using a mobile device and was not aware of problems because of that. Quincy let me know why it was a problem. - Just in case, I could be mistaken, but if a relative of a situation is informed of something that is repeated by a so called witness, it IS considered a privilege or a person with a shared or common interest. If you dare read my entire post you will see what I am referring to. If you do not, I understand because it is indeed long and can be draining for someone to read.

No. You are misunderstanding privilege and why it applies to some statements and not others. There is no privilege that protects false statements made by one ordinary individual to another ordinary individual. The statement made by the neighbor to the relative is NOT privileged.

There are certain relationships where communications are considered confidential and privileged (e.g., attorney/client, doctor/patient, priest/parishioner) and there are certain reports made by an individual that can protect the reporter from civil actions if the report is made in good faith (e.g., reports to the police, reports to CPS). And there are privileges as mentioned earlier that covers statements made in legal proceedings and those who provide fair and accurate reports of these proceedings.

I think you need to sit down with an attorney in your area.

Good luck.

 

[Shebarb]

No. You are misunderstanding privilege and why it applies to some statements and not others. There is no privilege that protects false statements made by one ordinary individual to another ordinary individual. The statement made by the neighbor to the relative is NOT privileged.

There are certain relationships where communications are considered confidential and privileged (e.g., attorney/client, doctor/patient, priest/parishioner) and there are certain reports made by an individual that can protect the reporter from civil actions if the report is made in good faith (e.g., reports to the police, reports to CPS). And there are privileges as mentioned earlier that covers statements made in legal proceedings and those who provide fair and accurate reports of these proceedings.

I think you need to sit down with an attorney in your area.

Good luck.

I'm confused because of what all these other sites describe regarding public and private figures. They're not forums. They are just different legal websites. I should have come here first. Thank you again and I'll get back in a few weeks. I just found out this morning the defendant has requested to adjourn until beginning of December. Not sure why. I was told I have to wait and see if the judge signs off on that.

 

[quincy]

I'm confused because of what all these other sites describe regarding public and private figures. They're not forums. They are just different legal websites. I should have come here first. Thank you again and I'll get back in a few weeks. I just found out this morning the defendant has requested to adjourn until beginning of December. Not sure why. I was told I have to wait and see if the judge signs off on that.

I don't know what you read on other sites but if they led you to believe that a privilege attaches to a communication between a neighbor and a relative, you were led astray. No such privilege exists.

Let us know what happens.

Good luck.

 

[Shebarb]

I don't know what you read on other sites but if they led you to believe that a privilege attaches to a communication between a neighbor and a relative, you were led astray. No such privilege exists.

Let us know what happens.

Good luck.

The relative is not that of the accuser. The relative is the sister of the deceased. The deceased is the person's who apartment I am being accused of breaking into or trying to break into. My original post was so long and possibly hard to follow. Understandable. Also, I could understand if this neighbor mentioned to his landlord that I was there and it was late, but not to say such a thing as I was trying to break in. I think, and could be wrong again, that that may be considered a privilege because the landlord shares a common interest. I could see that as talking with the landlord in good faith possibly, but again, not accuse me of such a thing. Unfortunately, I can't sit down with a lawyer before the court case. I just hope that this person/the defendant does not by chance see this thread and try to change his story. There is something I'm afraid to keep repeating for that reason so I'll leave it out and pray it's one of those cases where justice will be served. People go through so much worse. Thanks very much again. I appreciate it very much. Win or lose, I'm fighting and will keep you posted. Enjoy your weekend.

 

[quincy]

The relative is not that of the accuser. The relative is the sister of the deceased. The deceased is the person's who apartment I am being accused of breaking into or trying to break into. My original post was so long and possibly hard to follow. Understandable. Also, I could understand if this neighbor mentioned to his landlord that I was there and it was late, but not to say such a thing as I was trying to break in. I think, and could be wrong again, that that may be considered a privilege because the landlord shares a common interest. I could see that as talking with the landlord in good faith possibly, but again, not accuse me of such a thing. Unfortunately, I can't sit down with a lawyer before the court case. I just hope that this person/the defendant does not by chance see this thread and try to change his story. There is something I'm afraid to keep repeating for that reason so I'll leave it out and pray it's one of those cases where justice will be served. People go through so much worse. Thanks very much again. I appreciate it very much. Win or lose, I'm fighting and will keep you posted. Enjoy your weekend.

I understood what you said originally. No privilege attaches to the communication either way, though.

A privilege is a special legal exemption or immunity from suit that covers a select few statements and a select few relationships.

Privilege attaches to communications between attorneys and their clients, doctors and their patients, priests and their penitents, journalists and their anonymous sources, husbands and their wives ... and there are privileges that attach to statements made in the course of and with reference to judicial proceedings, reports made to the police and to CPS, and (in a few states) privilege attaches to intracorporate communications.

These privileges can be absolute (absolute immunity from suit) or qualified (subject to defeat if not exercised properly).

But there is no privilege that covers statements made between two individuals that are not in a protected relationship. Falsehoods that are communicated to a third person that cause injury to an individual's or an entity's reputation can be the basis for a defamation lawsuit.

Good luck in court and thanks for the thanks.

 

[Shebarb]

I understood what you said originally. No privilege attaches to the communication either way, though.

A privilege is a special legal exemption or immunity from suit that covers a select few statements and a select few relationships.

Privilege attaches to communications between attorneys and their clients, doctors and their patients, priests and their penitents, journalists and their anonymous sources, husbands and their wives ... and there are privileges that attach to statements made in the course of and with reference to judicial proceedings, reports made to the police and to CPS, and (in a few states) privilege attaches to intracorporate communications.

These privileges can be absolute (absolute immunity from suit) or qualified (subject to defeat if not exercised properly).

But there is no privilege that covers statements made between two individuals that are not in a protected relationship. Falsehoods that are communicated to a third person that cause injury to an individual's or an entity's reputation can be the basis for a defamation lawsuit.

Good luck in court and thanks for the thanks.

I went to court earlier. The judge dismissed it without prejudice. He actually went off the record for a few minutes and told the clerks to turn the tape off. He told me I needed to prove damages. Although I was shaking I tried telling him that I thought defamation per se, in my case being accused of a crime, meant you did not have to prove damages. He repeatedly told me I did. I couldn't lie and try to make something up. I didn't lose a job, get refused a job etc., but I sure wasn't going to argue with the judge. I hope other people can learn from this thread. I must admit I'm thoroughly confused though. Is the judge really wrong? All in all, I chose to speak to the defendant outside. I feel too bad taking him back to court. I won't do it, but boy did the judge baffle me. Was probably me just being very nervous and all.

 

[quincy]

I went to court earlier. The judge dismissed it without prejudice. He actually went off the record for a few minutes and told the clerks to turn the tape off. He told me I needed to prove damages. Although I was shaking I tried telling him that I thought defamation per se, in my case being accused of a crime, meant you did not have to prove damages. He repeatedly told me I did. I couldn't lie and try to make something up. I didn't lose a job, get refused a job etc., but I sure wasn't going to argue with the judge. I hope other people can learn from this thread. I must admit I'm thoroughly confused though. Is the judge really wrong? All in all, I chose to speak to the defendant outside. I feel too bad taking him back to court. I won't do it, but boy did the judge baffle me. Was probably me just being very nervous and all.

Thank you for the update.

For a small claims action, you must have evidence of monetary damages. This was explained to you in an earlier post. Small claims courts are generally not the proper courts for defamation claims where injury is not always economic harm.

Although the judge has not barred you from refiling your lawsuit, if you decide to refile (in a higher court), I recommend you first go over all facts with an attorney in your area. As said earlier, if a judge determines the communication was defamatory per se, the case can proceed without proof of reputational injury (the injury is presumed). But without demonstrable injury, any damages awarded could be nominal (as low as a dollar) - and that is if you win your case. As noted earlier, the neighbor could have legitimate defense.

I am sorry your small claims lawsuit did not work as you hoped it might.

 

[Shadowbunny]

The question is whether a "reasonable person" would have made the same assumptions given the same set of circumstances.



Based on the early morning hours, it was probably not an overreaction by the neighbor. If you feared the neighbor and his gun, a call to the police would have been appropriate.



Small claims are limited to actions seeking monetary compensation for losses supported by evidence. It is not the proper court for seeking compensation for reputational injuries that are not economic injuries. You cannot seek pain and suffering or presumed damages in a small claims court.

I fear your small claims action will go nowhere. I recommend you consult with an attorney in your area.

Good luck.

Shebarb, see quincy's post that I've quoted above.

 

[quincy]

Shebarb, see quincy's post that I've quoted above.

Thanks, Shadowbunny.

I thought I had questioned Shebarb's intention to file in a small claims court.

The judge was nice to take time to offer Shebarb some direction.

 

[Shebarb]

Thanks, Shadowbunny.

I thought I had questioned Shebarb's intention to file in a small claims court.

The judge was nice to take time to offer Shebarb some direction.

I am amazed. Although you all didn't give me what I wanted to hear, it was the TRUTH! I thank you so very much for clearing this all up for me. Also, I had no idea that what the judge in small claims was telling me to be true. I was losing my faith and thought I was being taken advantage of because of my demeanor or behavior so to speak. It does happen to lots of us! Looking forward to reaching out to you all again. You have exceeded my expectations without mentioning other sites. And "Thanks, thanks again" to you Quincy.

 

[Shebarb]

Shebarb, see quincy's post that I've quoted above.

I just wanted to say "Thank You" to you also. I really believed that I was being "bleeped over" (please pardon me) or taken advantage of by the judge. This really helps restore my humanity and not believe that the world is so corrupt. Thank you again. 👍

 

[quincy]

I am amazed. Although you all didn't give me what I wanted to hear, it was the TRUTH! I thank you so very much for clearing this all up for me. Also, I had no idea that what the judge in small claims was telling me to be true. I was losing my faith and thought I was being taken advantage of because of my demeanor or behavior so to speak. It does happen to lots of us! Looking forward to reaching out to you all again. You have exceeded my expectations without mentioning other sites. And "Thanks, thanks again" to you Quincy.

You're welcome, Shebarb.

Thanks for the thanks. They are appreciated.

Again, I am sorry your court action did not go as you wanted it to. And I am sorry for the loss of your friend.

 

[Shadowbunny]

I just wanted to say "Thank You" to you also. I really believed that I was being "bleeped over" (please pardon me) or taken advantage of by the judge. This really helps restore my humanity and not believe that the world is so corrupt. Thank you again. 👍

Glad to have helped, even if it was just to find quincy's wisdom and repost it.

 

[quincy]

Glad to have helped, even if it was just to find quincy's wisdom and repost it.

It can sometimes be very difficult to find my "wisdom."