If you have been targeted by defamatory statements, you have the right to represent yourself at trial. In the legal community, this is known as proceeding “pro se.” If you choose to file your defamation lawsuit without an attorney’s help, you should follow these four steps. Defamation Pro Se Step #1: Know What You Need to Prove In every lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove a list of facts known as elements. In order to prepare your defamation case, you’ll need to be extremely familiar with the elements that apply to your defamation lawsuit. When you encounter a piece of evidence, you must immediately know which element of your case it proves. Defamation is a broader term for two specific legal theories: libel and slander. For libel, the basic elements are:…

With the increased popularity of the internet, it is safe to say that the number of online defamation cases will continue to rise. In short, this occurs when somebody posts a false statement about another person on the internet. Although online defamation is quite common, not every instance leads to a lawsuit. That being said, this is becoming more and more common. For this reason, online defamation lawyers are staying busy with a variety of cases. The main goal of an online defamation attorney is to have these statements removed from the website where the information was posted as well as major search engines. As you can imagine, this is easier said than done. While there are some people who attempt to deal with online defamation on their own, this…

Authorities in the United Kingdom are eager to eradicate libel tourism and allow for a greater degree of Internet free speech, while at the same time providing ample opportunity for defamed individuals to have libelous content removed from the Web. Current Online Defamation Laws In The United Kingdom While free speech is just as important to Queen Elizabeth’s subjects as it is to U.S. Citizens, the U.K.’s Defamation Act of 1996 does little to uphold the ideal. Section I of the statute does provide a modicum of litigation protection for passive website operators, but the law says that operators can be held libel for any defamatory statements if notice was given and removal was refused. Since most website owners don’t have the legal IQ to determine the validity of a…

Eliot Spitzer is facing more legal problems. William Gilman and Edward McNenney – two ex-insurance executives — are suing the ex-governor and Slate.com for a combined $90 million dollars. The pair claim Spitzer disparaged their reputations in an editorial he wrote that was posted on Slate. Gilman is seeking $60 million in Manhattan Federal Court, while McNenney is asking the state court for $30 million. A Little Background About The Defamation Before his dalliances with professional escort, Ashley Dupree, became public knowledge, Eliot Spitzer was a politician with a bright future. As New York’s Attorney General, he went after high-profile finance guys suspected of shady dealings, and as a result, his prominence grew in Democratic party circles. In fact, back in 2004, the Nation magazine praised Spitzer as “the single…

Defamation is illegal; but proving it is hard. Many standards must be met in order to win an online defamation lawsuit. Moreover, the statue allows for a significant amount of interpretation, so each case must be thoroughly examined on its own merits. Defamation is when a person makes a false statement — which could be interpreted as fact — that points a negative light on another person, business or government. Slander is spoken defamation, while libel is written defamation. In other words, if a person types false comments online, they are not committing slander, but instead, libel. The only time when online defamation is considered to be slander is when the statement in question is part of an online video. Currently, only two nations — China and South Korea —…

This is the second part in our short series of notable United States defamation lawsuits. Click here for the first installment. Defamation laws are sure to evolve over the next several decades. The Internet is now a ubiquitous part of our lives and has dramatically altered the way we communicate friends and family, conduct business and get our news. The rise of social media platforms has also complicated what it means to defame another. Is Twitter considered a news outlet that should be held to the same standards as national newspapers? Are all messages on one’s Facebook page count as opinion or are they generally interpreted as fact? These and others are questions currently being explored in courts across the country. Let’s take a look back at a few monumental…

Oh, Courtney Love. The Hole front-woman has found herself in the center of yet another costly legal battle. This time around, the notoriously erratic Courtney is paying up for defaming a fashion designer, Dawn Simorangkir, online. Love’s unlovely tweet-rants are costing her a cool $430,000. Courtney’s Online Defamation Story It all started in 2009 after Love had bought some clothing from Simorangkir —an up-and-coming clothing designer popularly known as the “Boudoir Queen”. Apparently, Dawn and Courtney got into a disagreement over a $4,000 bill. Love said she didn’t owe it, Simorangkir insisted she did. Instead of handling the dispute in private, Courtney decided to take to Twitter and unleashed a tirade. Accusations ranged from assault and battery, to prostitution, to drug dealing. In one of her more prolific tweets, Love…

Are you ready for round 5,000,007 of the bout between the elephants and donkeys? This time around, in the right corner wearing the red trunks, we’ve got conservative blogger, Andrew Breitbart; and donning blue in the left is ex Department of Agriculture official, Shirley Sherrod. Replete with accusation of defamation, racism and revenge, Sherrod vs. Breitbart has all the makings of a juicy legal showdown—the kind of case a modern day Atticus Finch would love to argue. But the question remains: with whom would Scout’s dad side. The Ballad of Blogger Breitbart and Stateswoman Sherrod Since the day the Founding Fathers ratified the Constitution, US Presidential elections have been exemplary case studies in political mudslinging. Without fail, during election season, passionate public interest groups have a tendency to engage in…

Believe it or not, your “fame quotient” dictates what you have to prove when perusing a defamation lawsuit. It’s one of the few things in life where celebrities and politicians have it harder than you or me. It’s much easier for a private citizen to win a defamation lawsuit than a famous (or notorious) person. In fact, recognizable people who did not intentionally seek notoriety, but somehow became inserted into common discourse, will often try to argue that they’re not “public figures” when filling libel and/or slander claims. Recently, this denial of fame tactic was used by jailhouse-lawyer/convicted felon, Edmund D. LaChance, Jr. The Desire to Date In 2005, Ed thought it was about time he branched out and nurtured his inner Bridget Jones. So, he dug deep, wrote what…

In the United States, defamation has always been a legal arena known to expand and change with the advent of new communication mediums and social mores. Due to the Constitution’s free speech guarantee, defamation has also always been very difficult to prove in American law courts. With the Web now a permanent part of our lives, you can expect defamation legislation to, once again, mold and change. Cosby v. Zenger One of the first, pre-Constitutional, defamation lawsuits involved British Governor William Cosby and newspaper editor, Peter Zenger. Encouraged and backed by high-powered, influential anti-colonists, Zenger printed anonymous editorials in his Daily Journal accusing Cosby of fixing elections and misappropriating taxes. Cosby was outraged by the accusations and demanded that the local government grant him the right to shut down Zenger’s…