ANSWERS: 8
  • In legal terms, this is called slander. . .which is a civil matter and defined as . . . A type of defamation. Slander is an untruthful oral (spoken) statement about a person that harms the person's reputation or standing in the community. Because slander is a tort (a civil wrong), the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement. If the statement is made via broadcast media -- for example, over the radio or on TV -- it is considered libel, rather than slander, because the statement has the potential to reach a very wide audience. You could bring a civil suit against them if what they are saying does meet the definition of slander. See http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/term/E0563767-C3CE-42B0-90107F29AF588A6C
  • Here's a very brief description of the two main areas of law you should perhaps be looking at, but first there is an important . . . CAVEAT: Any legal advice acquired through a channel such as this should be regarded as For Amusement Only. If you're describing an actually existent problem, CONSULT AN ATTORNEY. That said, the following may give you a brief overview of some of the things you'll be talking to that attorney about. Your basic choices are first, to sue for defamation of character under the libel or slander laws (depending on whether the spreading is merely oral -- slander -- or in some tangible or broadcast form -- libel), or second, to sue under invasion of privacy laws. Invasion of privacy here means not the generalized right that's getting a lot of media attention (identity theft issues, gov't intrusion, data-sharing) but particular laws available to individuals, either statutory or under the common law of your state. Defamation means disseminating false information that tends to subject you to shame, humiliation or public obloquy in the community ("vicious rumors"). Truth is a defense -- at trial, you'll have to show that the things said were false, and the defendant knew them to be false or recklessly disregarded whether they were true or not. You'll have to not be a public figure (candidate, official, or someone who has injected himself or herself into a public controversy). If you are, it's all but impossible to sue -- free speech trumps defamation. If you are only a celebrity, the limits on free speech are narrower. It's not easy but celebrities do get judgments against the gutter press. (There's no actual public interest in the behavior of movie stars, as there is in the behavior of elected officials; mere curiosity is not interest.) The defamation will have to have definitely identified you, which may not require actually naming you. The defamation will have to be such as to be serious in your actual community and society (what is defaming in a church basement might not be in an NFL locker room). And there are other wrinkles your attorney will inquire about. An action for defamation usually requires an initial showing of actual damages, meaning some modicum of existing financial harm, as a predicate to allowing the suit to proceed. You have to show that people stopped dealing with you, you were fired, not promoted, or some such, or perhaps that your mental or physical health was affected, causing expenses for treatment, perhaps work lost, etc. The amount need not be large to trigger the action, but it must have already occurred. But there are a handful of libels ("libel per se") considered so damaging that no separate showing of financial harm is required to permit a suit. Traditional examples included things like claiming that a kosher butcher did not in fact follow proper protocols, or alleging unchastity of a woman or homosexuality of a man (query those last two in light of current mores) and alleging child abuse would probably qualify. Once this requirement of some financial damage is met and the suit is allowed to proceed, punitive damages, which are intended to punish a guilty defendant, and are in amounts decided by the jury for the purpose, may be sought. Note that if your action is for libel, that is, defamation in writing or some other tangible medium or by a broadcast of some sort, presumably including publication over the internet, you may be able to sue ("have a cause of action against") not only the original defamer, but anyone who subsequently republishes the libel -- passes it on or perhaps only allows it to remain in existence when they had a duty to remove it. Invasion of privacy as it came into existence in American common law comes in four "flavors": Unauthorized appropriation of name or likeness; unwarranted physical intrusion; offensive public revelation of true but private facts in which the public had no interest; and "false light" invasion of privacy -- publishing false information, which is essentially defamation and the part probably relevant to you. The important difference from defamation is that under an invasion of privacy claim, no showing of financial harm is required to get the suit started. Moreover, it may be possible to use flavor three -- offensive revelation of true but private facts -- if the defamer is mixing in details that are true but nobody else's business, and the revelation of which is offensive. Again, this is a bare-bones outline of things your attorney will be talking to you about. More is available at http://injury-law.freeadvice.com/libel_and_slander/ among many others. I emphasize again that no amount of online research or reading can substitute for experienced professional advice. For example, not all states may allow all the invasion of privacy actions described above or treat them in the same way. There are numerous wrinkles to defamation and invasion of privacy not touched above, and in any event every individual case has unique details that MUST be assessed by someone who really knows. The good news: many attorneys -- perhaps most -- will conduct an initial interview for free or at a very reduced rate in order to determine whether you appear to have a cause of action. If you have no other source of information about lawyers, your local bar association will be happy to refer you to someone. Good luck.
  • You could go to the court claming for the defemation. You could get that person behind the bars and also get monetry compensation for all the mental stress through which yu had to go due to that person. But a very important thing to win this kind of case is that u should be able to prove in the court that all those roumers which were spread by that person about you were false and were not true. For example--- if a person spreads the news that x is a divorced person, which the x inreality is than the x could not calim compensation for spreading a news whihc is in fact true.
  • Ignore it. Live your life truthfully, quietly, and humbly. Pray for peace, understanding, and love to the individual(s) involved. Stand tall, and shine. Most of all do not form a pity party, or waste your time saying why me....what have I done...etc. Once they see that you can function in the eye of a storm, they will stop the insanity. Others believe what they will. Your friends will be easy to spot.
  • Call um out and put him/her up against a wall. Don't let anyone ever disgrace your beautiful name. It happens to celebrities all the time, but that's because ppl feed on lies. Don't let this person get away with this. Go to someone in authority and discuss this with them on your options. Slander is against the law.
  • Just admit you did them although you didnt, believe me after that they will stop!
  • Take legal action. I believe that would fall under slander and/or defammation of character.
  • IF you have PROOF ; then you can sue them for "Slander" ... It helps if you can also PROVE that you have "Suffered" mentally/emotionally and / OR Financially from their actions ... Unless severe ; you can usually sue thru the Small Claims Court for your stat's maximum of $3,000 to $5,000 depending on where you live .. +5

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy