What is Defamation?
This summer, news outlets across the nation have tracked developments in two high-profile celebrity defamation lawsuits. The trial between actors and former spouses Johnny Depp and Amber Heard involved claims for defamation asserted by Mr. Depp against Ms. Heard and concluded on June 1, 2022. Currently, the damages trial arising from defamation claims asserted by parents of children tragically murdered in the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting against conservative political commentator Alex Jones is sweeping the headlines. The Sandy Hook trial is focused solely on the amount of damages owed by Jones to the Sandy Hook parents after the court entered a default judgment against Jones for multiple failures to comply with discovery, finding Jones liable for the alleged defamation as a sanction for discovery misconduct. The public interest in both trials has led many individuals to wonder what exactly constitutes defamation.
In Nevada, defamation consists of the publication of a false statement of fact. There are two forms of defamation, libel and slander. Generally, slander is a defamatory statement that is spoken while libel is a defamatory statement made in writing. Some forms of defamatory communications are referred to as slander per se or libel per se. To constitute defamation per se in Nevada, the allegedly slanderous or libelous statement generally must relate to one of four specific subjects. Specifically, a claim that the plaintiff committed crime; that the plaintiff has contracted a “loathsome disease”; that a “woman is unchaste”; or, the allegation must be one which would tend to effect the plaintiff in his or her trade, business, profession or office. Defamation per se is unique in that damages are presumed to result from defamatory statements made concerning these subjects.
Oftentimes, public figures bear a heavier burden then private citizens to prove a claim of defamation. Typically, to prevail on a claim for defamation, the public figure must prove that the statements the figure claims were defamatory were made with “actual malice.” That is, that the statements were made with knowledge that the statements were false, or reckless disregard of whether the statements were true or false. In the Jones case, because the defamation claims are being asserted against the public figure, the elevated standard of actual malice would not have applied had the case proceeded to trial on liability in the absence of a default judgment.
The Nevada Supreme Court has held that statements of opinion cannot be defamatory because “there is no such thing as a false idea.” Similarly, a statement is not defamatory if it is an exaggeration or generalization that could be interpreted by a reasonable person as “mere rhetorical hyperbole. Nor is a statement defamatory if it is absolutely true, or substantially true. A statement is, however, defamatory if it “would tend to lower the subject in the estimation of the community, excite derogatory opinions about the subject, and hold the subject up to contempt.”
If you have additional questions on the subject of defamation, the attorneys at Lemons, Grundy & Eisenberg may be able to advise you.