Started By
Message
re: This stupid Ole Miss / Rebel rags lawsuit
Posted on 6/15/17 at 9:36 am to tigerinridgeland
Posted on 6/15/17 at 9:36 am to tigerinridgeland
quote:
However, the allegations are that the named defendants knowingly made false statements, so the plaintiff will have to prove defendants made intentionally false statements. That is a pretty straight forward issue, but may not be easy to actually prove.
This is the key on the defamation claim to me. The burden is on the plaintiff to prove knowingly false statements were made. That's a hard standard to meet in any case, but especially this one.
quote:
If false statements were made in writing (libel)
Not sure about MS law, but I'm not sure a signed testimony would fall under libel. Also, still a gray area to me on whether or not it could be argued this was testimony in an agreed upon court (athlete & school are both voluntary members of NCAA and, thus, agree that NCAA rules are the "law"). If defense can argue that point, then the testimony could be argued as privileged.
1
Posted on 6/15/17 at 9:59 am to bamasgot13
While negligence would be the standard ordinarily in a case not involving a public figure, it really isn't an option in this case due to the nature of the allegations. If, for example, Lewis said RR gave him free material, that is either a true statement, or knowingly false. Not much room for negligence, not has it been pleaded as a negligence case.
It really won't matter if the statements are written or oral. If it a signed affidavit, it would be libel. If it was oral testimony that was transcribed, it is most likely slander. In either case, no actual or special damages would be required, since it la a libel or slander per se case for the plaintiff's point of view.
Privilege won't apply since the statements were not part of a judicial proceeding and other privileges are qualified. Intentional false statements are not privileged in a qualified privilege situation
It really won't matter if the statements are written or oral. If it a signed affidavit, it would be libel. If it was oral testimony that was transcribed, it is most likely slander. In either case, no actual or special damages would be required, since it la a libel or slander per se case for the plaintiff's point of view.
Privilege won't apply since the statements were not part of a judicial proceeding and other privileges are qualified. Intentional false statements are not privileged in a qualified privilege situation
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News