Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
In December 2014, P publicly accused D of forcibly raping her some 40 years earlier. D’s attorney responded on his behalf by writing and leaking a defamatory letter. According to P, the letter deliberately distorts her personal background to “damage her reputation for truthfulness and honesty, and further to embarrass, harass, humiliate, intimidate, and shame” her. P alleges that excerpts of the letter were disseminated via the Internet and published by news outlets around the world. P filed suit in federal court for defamation under state law, but her case was dismissed. P appealed. The Court of Appeals concluded that, by disclosing her accusations to a reporter, P had “‘thrust’ herself to the ‘forefront’” of the public controversy over “sexual assault allegations implicating D” and was therefore a “limited purpose public figure.” Public figures are barred from recovering damages for defamation unless they can show that the statement at issue was made with “‘actual malice’-that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.” P was unable to make that showing.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co