Tort Law-It's the Law
The truth is always a complete defense to a defamation claim.
Some statements, although defamatory, are protected by a qualified or absolute privilege. For instance, a statement made by an employer about an employee to a new prospective employer may be governed by a qualified privilege. The idea is to allow employers to freely exchange information about employees. What that means is that the employee in a defamation action against the former employer may have to claim and prove that there actually was some malice in the statements that were made.
An absolute privilege would be one that is an absolute bar to a claim for defamation. For instance, comments made in the course of a judicial proceeding are generally governed by such a privilege. The idea is to allow the parties to freely exchange comments during such a proceeding.
Claims of false imprisonment and malicious prosecution arise in the context of a person improperly restraining another person or initiating a criminal prosecution that is subsequently found to be unjustified.
Fraud is the intentional misrepresentation of a material fact made for the purpose of inducing reliance and that does induce reliance to the detriment or damage of the plaintiff. Fraud is a very difficult thing to prove. Unlike most civil claims that must be proven simply by a preponderance of the evidence or what is referred to as the greater weight of the evidence, fraud claims must be proved by clear and convincing evidence, which is a much higher standard and much more difficult to prove. The reason for the higher standard of proof in fraud claims is that the law recognizes fraud as an offense involving surreptitious behavior that may be subject to different interpretations. It is therefore felt that the plaintiff should have a more difficult burden of proof in these types of claims than would apply in the run-of-the-mill tort claims that may be asserted.
Another intentional tort is called the intentional infliction of emotional distress. To pursue such a claim, you must prove that the conduct of the defendant was intentional and outrageous, that the conduct caused emotional distress, and that the emotional distress was severe. It is often difficult to meet all of these elements.
Some statements, although defamatory, are protected by a qualified or absolute privilege. For instance, a statement made by an employer about an employee to a new prospective employer may be governed by a qualified privilege. The idea is to allow employers to freely exchange information about employees. What that means is that the employee in a defamation action against the former employer may have to claim and prove that there actually was some malice in the statements that were made.
An absolute privilege would be one that is an absolute bar to a claim for defamation. For instance, comments made in the course of a judicial proceeding are generally governed by such a privilege. The idea is to allow the parties to freely exchange comments during such a proceeding.
Claims of false imprisonment and malicious prosecution arise in the context of a person improperly restraining another person or initiating a criminal prosecution that is subsequently found to be unjustified.
Fraud is the intentional misrepresentation of a material fact made for the purpose of inducing reliance and that does induce reliance to the detriment or damage of the plaintiff. Fraud is a very difficult thing to prove. Unlike most civil claims that must be proven simply by a preponderance of the evidence or what is referred to as the greater weight of the evidence, fraud claims must be proved by clear and convincing evidence, which is a much higher standard and much more difficult to prove. The reason for the higher standard of proof in fraud claims is that the law recognizes fraud as an offense involving surreptitious behavior that may be subject to different interpretations. It is therefore felt that the plaintiff should have a more difficult burden of proof in these types of claims than would apply in the run-of-the-mill tort claims that may be asserted.
Another intentional tort is called the intentional infliction of emotional distress. To pursue such a claim, you must prove that the conduct of the defendant was intentional and outrageous, that the conduct caused emotional distress, and that the emotional distress was severe. It is often difficult to meet all of these elements.
