“Only verifiable statements of fact can be libelous.”

“Only verifiable statements of fact can be libelous.” So sayeth New York Supreme Court Justice Alice Schlesinger in rejecting a defamation claim brought by Sandals resort against an anonymous critic. (source)

Too bad that so many other judges are too stupid to understand this basic legal principle.

3 Responses to “Only verifiable statements of fact can be libelous.”

  1. arizonaplatt says:

    Interesting. But as I understand it, a judge in your (and my) favorite southern state ruled that a series of statements prefaced with “In my opinion…” may still be libelous if the person making the statements is merely using the preamble as a ploy. The issue of whether an opinion really is intended as an opinion, or is intended to create a factual impression in the mind of the reader, seems open to interpretation where the fact is not easily verified.

  2. Harry Mauron says:

    Based on the 4th Cir case Snyder v. Phelps, even verifiable (false) facts aren’t libelous, as long as you hold up hyperbolic signs and use frothy-mouth rhetoric all around it. Exclamation points seem to help too. (e.g., God hates lawyers! All lawyers to hell! Phelps is pedophile! Preachers are evil!)


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,684 other followers

%d bloggers like this: