Lent v. Huntoon, 470 A.2d 1162

Supreme Court of Vermont

1983

Chapter

17

Title

Defamation

Page

714

Topic

Defamation Defined

Quick Notes

Libel, slander, exception to actionable per se, defenses to slander, and liability to defamation.  Majority Rule Case

Book Name

Torts Cases, Problems, And Exercises.  Weaver, Third Edition.  ISBN:  978-1-4224-7220-0.

Issue

o         Whether?

Procedure

Trial

o         Trial jury found Huntoon liable for defamation.  $15,000 in compensatory and $25,000 in punitive damages.

Supreme

o         Affirmed

Facts

Reason

Rules

o         Pl - Lent

o         Df - Huntoon

What happened?

o         The Pl - worked for Huntoon Business machines for 13 years.

o         The Pl told the Df he was moving to Florida and would train his successor.

o         Shortly thereafter, the Df fired the Pl without notice.

Lent

o         Created his own equipment business, mainly cash register sales and service.

o         He was now in competition with Huntoon

Huntoon Written Libel Conduct

o         Sent a letter cash register franchise customers, saying Lent was discharged for sound business reasons.

Huntoon Oral Slander Conduct

o         Said Lent had a criminal record a mile long.

o         Stolen merchandize and money.

o         Incompetent and untrustworthy.

Affected Lent

o         Letter caused Pl to become estranged from customers.

o         Physical and emotion discomfort.

Evidence Against Huntoon

o         There was never a complaint concerning Lent before he was terminated.

o         Huntoon knew Lent was leaving and he was not fired.

o         Huntoon continued to make statement about Lent even after Lent asked him to stop.

o         Defamation is composed of libel and slander

o         Libel - Written and more serious

o         Slander Oral and less serious.

Libel

o         Considered to be actionable per se.

o         The Pl need not allege nor prove he suffered any special damages as a direct or proximate result of libel. 

o         Special damages are presumed.

o         Example:  Loss of customers or business, loss of contracts, or loss of employment.

Slander

o         Generally not actionable per se.

o         Special damages are not presumed and must be alleged and proven.

Slander Exceptions to actionable per se, and special damages need not be proven

Spoken defamation involving:

(1)     Imputation [attribution] of a crime,

(2)     Statements injurious to one's trade, business or occupation,

(3)     Charges of having a loathsome disease were deemed slander per se and were actionable without proof of special damages.

(4)     Charging a woman to be unchaste.

General Elements of Private Action For Defamation (libel and/or slander)

(1)       a false and defamatory statement concerning another;

(2)       some negligence, or greater fault, in publishing the statement;

(3)       Publication to at least one third person;

(4)       Lack of privilege in the publication;

(5)       Special damages, unless actionable per se; and

(6)       Some actual harm so as to warrant compensatory damages.

Special Rule of Procedure

o         One the Pl - evidence was in, the court had to determine whether the written or spoken words were defamatory as a matter of law.

o         If the court was in doubt because the connotation of the written or spoken words was ambiguous, then the court had to submit the question to the jury to decide.

o         We are talking about economic or pecuniary damages.

o         Ex:  Loss of customers, business, contracts, or employment.

General Damages

         Non Economic or Non Pecuniary damages

         Ex:  harm to reputation, humiliation, or emotion or mental distress.

Tradition Tort Rule

o         Pl could not recovery any general damages unless he or she could prove special damages.

Libel Actions

o         Libel per se means defamatory as a matter of law which is actionable per se.

o         Since all libel is actionable per se, it makes no difference whether the court rules that the written words are defamatory as a matter of law, or that the written words are ambiguous and the jury determines that there is defamation; in each instance special damages need not be proven.

Libel per quod

o         Some writings, however, are seemingly innocent in and of themselves, and resort must be had to extrinsic evidence to determine if they have defamatory qualities.

o         If the writing together with the extrinsic evidence constitutes defamation, such a writing is referred to as "libel per quod" in several American jurisdictions.

o         These  jurisdictions require that special damages be proven for libel per quod, unless the libel falls into one of the slander per se exceptions.

o         Under this rule, the simple fact that extrinsic evidence must be used to prove the defamatory nature of a libel prevents it from being "actionable per se" and special damages must be proven.

Supreme Court of Vermont

o         Does not recognize libel per quod.

o         We hold that libel, whether defamatory on the face of the writing alone or with the aid of extrinsic evidence, is actionable per se.

Rule

o         The jury decides if a writing is ambiguous or not.

In This Case

o         One count for libel

o         Once count for slander.

Defenses to defamation

o         Truth

o         Privilege

Truth

o         Defeats the action and is a COMPLETE defense.

Privilege (Protecting your own business interest, prof said not on exam)

o         Is a conditional privilege which may be overcome by a showing of malice.

o         The burden of proving privilege is on the Df.

o         Pl may defeat malice, however, he must show malice by clear and convincing proof.

Df Alleged Privilege

o         To protect his legitimate business interests.

Inferring Malice

o         The court will infer malice upon a showing that the defendant knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard of its truth

o         Actual malice includes spiteful or wanton conduct

Liability for Defamation

o         Must logically be based on some showing of harm to the Pl.

o         This court will require defamation Pl - to demonstrate some actual harm as a prerequisite to recovering general damages.

o         Defamation that is actionable per se will require some showing of actual harm, but not of special damages before recovery of general, or compensatory, damages.

Punitive Damages

o         Once general (compensatory) damages are established, punitive damages may be awarded on a showing of actual malice, but actual malice may not be considered to enhance compensatory damages.

o         "[Malice] may be shown by conduct manifesting personal ill will or carried out under circumstances evidencing insult or oppression, or even by conduct showing a reckless or wanton disregard of one's rights."

o         Malice supporting punitive damages may be shown by proving that the defendant repeated the defamatory statement, especially when the repetition occurred after commencement of the lawsuit.

Holding Ample evidence for the jury to have found actual malice

(1)       Defendants knew that plaintiff had not been fired "for sound business reasons" but had, in fact, voluntarily left,

(2)       Huntoon said that plaintiff had stolen money and merchandise knowing this to be false,

(3)       Huntoon knew that plaintiff did not have a "record a mile long," and

(4)       Huntoon repeated the alleged slanderous statements.

AFFIRMED

Class Notes

Slander Exceptions to actionable per se, and special damages need not be proven

Spoken defamation involving:

(1)     Imputation [attribution] of a crime,

(2)     Statements injurious to one's trade, business or occupation,

(3)     Charges of having a loathsome disease.

(4)     Charging a woman to be unchaste.

General Elements of Private Action For Defamation (libel and/or slander)

(1)     a false and defamatory statement concerning another;

(2)     some negligence, or greater fault, in publishing the statement;

(3)     Publication to at least one third person;

(4)     Lack of privilege in the publication;

(5)     Special damages, unless actionable per se; and

(6)     Some actual harm so as to warrant compensatory damages.

Special Rule of Procedure

o         One the Pl - evidence was in, the court had to determine whether the written or spoken words were defamatory as a matter of law.

o         If the court was in doubt because the connotation of the written or spoken words was ambiguous, then the court had to submit the question to the jury to decide.

o         We are talking about economic or pecuniary damages.

o         Ex:  Loss of customers, business, contracts, or employment.

General Damages

         Non Economic or Non Pecuniary damages

         Ex:  harm to reputation, humiliation, or emotion or mental distress.

Tradition Tort Rule

o         Pl could not recovery any general damages unless he or she could prove special damages.

Libel per se and slander per se are treated the same way.

o         Slander is defamatory on its face.

Actionable per se it is actionable without the Pl have to prove damages.