Scribd
Upload
67 views

Statement of Assignement

The document outlines a legal case for defamation regarding false statements made about the author online. [1] The statements qualify as defamation and are not protected as opinions or matters of public interest. [2] The statements were made maliciously by a long-time social competitor who did not fact check the claims. [3] The defendant is liable for damages due to actual malice and damaging claims about the author's character, and the author is entitled to compensation for economic losses, mental health costs, and reputational harm.

Uploaded by

Raquel Duarte
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
67 views

Statement of Assignement

The document outlines a legal case for defamation regarding false statements made about the author online. [1] The statements qualify as defamation and are not protected as opinions or matters of public interest. [2] The statements were made maliciously by a long-time social competitor who did not fact check the claims. [3] The defendant is liable for damages due to actual malice and damaging claims about the author's character, and the author is entitled to compensation for economic losses, mental health costs, and reputational harm.

Uploaded by

Raquel Duarte
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

____________________ __________________

STATEMENT OF ASSIGNEMENT

The purpose of this memo is to present the best legal options amidst the threatening
defamatory statements made about me online. Following are some points highlighting
the protection provided by USA’s law, and the obstacles to successfully restore my
reputation.

ISSUE

1. Does the statement qualify as defamation?


2. Is the statement protected by the First Amendment rights of free speech and press?
3. Was the statement malicious?
4. Is the defendant liable for damages?

BRIEF ANSWER

1. Yes. The defamatory statement was libelous per se as it falsely imputes unchastity.
2. No. The assertion cannot be qualified as an opinion nor a fair comment on a matter
of public interest and is not under any conditional privilege.
3. Yes.
4. Yes, libeler is liable for exemplary damages and responsible for medical expenses.

FACTS

False libelous statements about me were written and published in a blog post. The
assertion publicly shared through social media, was untrue and defamatory when
claiming that I “(…) slept with a male professor to have a higher grade”. Despite not
being mentioned by name, I am reasonably identifiable as the “(…) blue-eyed suburban
girl who makes her home at Alfredo de Sousa’s Halls of Residence, dorm room no. 911
(…)”.

The false factual statement is libel per se. The defendant accused me of engaging in
sexual misconduct. For this reason and given the context, courts will consider that a
reasonable reader could comprehend the statement as a verifiable fact as it can be
proven true or false – it isn’t a matter of opinion. Therefore, it’s presumed that online
libel significantly damaged my reputation, mental health and potential future legal jobs,
and I won’t need to bother proving economic loss.

2
The statement was malicious and defamatory. The libeler is a long time jealous
social competitor of mine and was motivated by ill-will and malice. Plus, the defendant
did not do everything necessary to determine that statement was true as there was no
fact-checking prior making it public. Even though there’s actual malice, I wouldn’t
even have to bother to prove it as I have not associated myself to a public life. Indeed, I
would solemnly need to show negligence.

The defense cannot be based on fair comment nor conditional privilege. The First
Amendment rights of free speech and free press do not apply when the topic doesn't
involve an issue of public interest. Firstly, because the libeler didn’t act in good faith
nor honest belief when libeler made the statement. A reasonable person can’t honestly
entertain this idea. Besides, conditional privilege cannot be sustained in order to protect
statements made with actual malice.

The defendant is liable for exemplary damages due to malice and the accusation’s
subject being my chastity. I am entitled to receive damages for any future lost earning
capacity, and other lost business or economic opportunities I will likely lose because of
the defamatory statement. Moreover, I suffered mental pain, anxiety, emotional distress,
and sleep disturbances. Therefore, I will be eligible to recover damages for my mental
health care bills and expenses.

You might also like