Sentences with phrase «libel per»

The gist of her suit was that the Post, by quoting a MySpace page in which Cordero «gives a graphic depiction of a masturbatory fantasy» in which she has sex with multiple men and women, implied she was a «promiscuous slut» and therefore committed libel per se.

Falsely accusing someone of a crime is «libel per se», but that only means damages are assumed - it doesn't skip the «false» part.

Isn't that «libel per se» or something?

If I decide to say that the reason that Spencer is so often wrong is that «Roy W. Spencer is insane due to an advanced, untreated case of syphilis» then that would likely be libel per se, but I am not actually claiming that his many errors have occurred because «Roy W. Spencer is insane due to syphilis,» I'm just noting that as a hypothetical example that would be libel per se if I did say it, to show how inaccurately that legal jargon is being bandied about here.

Pointing out errors is libel per se or «an essential part of scientific progress»?

Mann's claim is entirely «libel per se».

His step - mother, uber - socialite Dede Wilsey, threatened legal action against his publisher (after excerpts had run in the New York Times and San Francisco Chronicle) in an attempt to stop publication of the book on the basis that there were more than 30 «actionably defamatory statements of fact... which constitute libel per se» (and that was just in the excerpts!).

Nevertheless, the letter accuses her of «libel per se and intentional infliction of emotional distress.»

«You and your client's false statements about Mr. Cohen accuse him of criminal conduct, and constitute, among other claims, libel per se and intentional infliction of emotional distress.»

Not exact matches

In most California slander and libel cases, plaintiffs must prove how the communications under review caused material harm — except in per se lawsuits.

So a false claim satisfying the definition of defamation would be libel if written (including on the Internet, per Varian Medical Systems, Inc. v. Delfino), and slander if made in a transient form.

The last element captures the traditional doctrine that slander (not libel) is only actionable if it falls into one of four or five specific categories («slander per se»), or if it actually causes economic injury.