My question involves defamation in the state of: Virginia
A person is being being accused of defamation. The defamation is said to have occurred on a website that this person is being accused of authoring.
The plaintiff contends that the defamation is by insinuation – that is all the information on the referenced website is true - But it makes the plaintiff look bad and hurts his reputation.
Here’s an example of what the plaintiff considers to be implied defamation:
Jan 1, 2014 – Mr. Smith (president of company) and Mr. Jones (CFO of company) both sign a document that allows Mr. Smith to withdraw his funds from a company-sponsored account when he leaves the company.
Jan 8, 2014 – Mr. Smith leaves the company and withdraws all his funds from the company-sponsored account.
Jan 8, 2014 – Mr. Jones is promoted to president of company.
Even though the above three statements are true - The plaintiff contends the above statements imply or insinuate that Mr. Jones was made president because he signed the document that allowed Mr. Smith to withdraw his money.
No where on the website does it mention any such thing. In fact there are no other references of Mr. Jones' promotion on the website.
The plaintiff’s complaint does not contend that any statement on the website is false.
The plaintiff states that the defendant put these alleged facts on the website maliciously with the intention that the statements through innuendo and insinuation would give rise to a defamatory implication.
The plaintiff believes this is a meritless lawsuit – is he correct?
How should the plaintiff proceed (pro se) to get this case dismissed?
Thank you for your time.
A person is being being accused of defamation. The defamation is said to have occurred on a website that this person is being accused of authoring.
The plaintiff contends that the defamation is by insinuation – that is all the information on the referenced website is true - But it makes the plaintiff look bad and hurts his reputation.
Here’s an example of what the plaintiff considers to be implied defamation:
Jan 1, 2014 – Mr. Smith (president of company) and Mr. Jones (CFO of company) both sign a document that allows Mr. Smith to withdraw his funds from a company-sponsored account when he leaves the company.
Jan 8, 2014 – Mr. Smith leaves the company and withdraws all his funds from the company-sponsored account.
Jan 8, 2014 – Mr. Jones is promoted to president of company.
Even though the above three statements are true - The plaintiff contends the above statements imply or insinuate that Mr. Jones was made president because he signed the document that allowed Mr. Smith to withdraw his money.
No where on the website does it mention any such thing. In fact there are no other references of Mr. Jones' promotion on the website.
The plaintiff’s complaint does not contend that any statement on the website is false.
The plaintiff states that the defendant put these alleged facts on the website maliciously with the intention that the statements through innuendo and insinuation would give rise to a defamatory implication.
The plaintiff believes this is a meritless lawsuit – is he correct?
How should the plaintiff proceed (pro se) to get this case dismissed?
Thank you for your time.
Defamation: Defamation by Insinuation
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire