Suing for Slander and Emotional Distress: What You Need to Know
Understand the legal and practical considerations involved in pursuing slander and emotional distress claims, including key requirements and potential outcomes.
False and damaging statements can inflict significant harm on a person’s reputation and mental well-being, potentially leading to legal claims for slander and emotional distress. Pursuing these claims, however, requires navigating specific legal standards.
This article outlines the key elements involved in lawsuits concerning slander and emotional distress.
Legal Elements of Slander
Slander refers to defamation through spoken words—a false statement presented as fact that injures someone’s reputation. While specific laws vary, several core elements are generally necessary to establish a slander claim.
A claim typically requires proving a false statement asserted as fact. Subjective opinions usually do not qualify. The statement must be objectively verifiable as false and must be defamatory, meaning it tends to harm the subject’s reputation within their community or discourage others from associating with them.
The statement must also be “published,” meaning communicated to at least one person other than the speaker and the subject. This communication confirms the potential for reputational damage, as it relies on the perception of others. A false statement made only to the person it concerns generally does not meet this requirement.
The speaker’s level of fault regarding the statement’s falsity is another critical element. The standard often depends on the subject’s status. Public officials or figures typically must prove “actual malice”—that the speaker knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.1Digital Media Law Project. Proving Fault: Actual Malice and Negligence For private individuals, the standard is usually lower, often requiring proof of negligence, meaning the speaker failed to exercise reasonable care in verifying the statement’s truth.
Finally, the subject must generally demonstrate they suffered actual harm due to the false statement, such as financial loss. An exception exists for “slander per se,” where certain types of statements are considered so inherently damaging that harm is presumed. These categories often include false accusations of serious criminal conduct, having a loathsome disease, serious sexual misconduct, or statements harming one’s profession or business. In such cases, proving specific damages may not be required.
Emotional Distress Requirements
False statements causing significant mental suffering might support a separate claim for emotional distress. Legal standards for these claims are high, particularly when no physical injury occurs.
One path is a claim for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED). This requires showing the defendant acted intentionally or recklessly to cause severe emotional distress through conduct considered “extreme and outrageous”—behavior exceeding all bounds of decency in a civilized society.2LSU Law Center. Elements of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Mere insults or annoyances are insufficient. There must also be a direct link between this conduct and the resulting emotional distress, which must be “severe.” Severe distress implies suffering so intense that no reasonable person should have to endure it, sometimes supported by evidence of required mental health treatment or diagnosis, though physical symptoms are not always mandatory.
Alternatively, a claim for Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (NIED) might be possible, though rules vary widely by jurisdiction. NIED generally requires proving the defendant was negligent, this negligence foreseeably caused severe emotional distress, and the plaintiff suffered such distress. Unlike IIED, intent or outrageous conduct isn’t required. However, many jurisdictions limit NIED claims, often requiring the plaintiff to have suffered a physical impact, been in the “zone of danger” (at immediate risk of physical harm), or, in some cases involving bystanders, witnessed serious injury to a close relative due to the defendant’s negligence.
Evidence and Court Procedures
Successfully suing for slander involves gathering specific evidence and following court procedures. Proving spoken words requires careful documentation. Witness testimony is often crucial; individuals who heard the statement must testify about its content, context, and audience. Recordings of the statement provide direct evidence.
Documentary evidence might include records proving the statement’s falsity or materials showing the speaker’s fault (negligence or actual malice). Proving actual malice, necessary for public figures, requires clear evidence that the speaker knew of the falsity or acted with reckless disregard for the truth, possibly shown through their research methods or motives.
The court process begins with the plaintiff filing a complaint detailing the slander, the defendant’s fault, and the harm caused.3United States Courts. Civil Cases The defendant responds with an answer. The case then moves to discovery, where both sides exchange information through tools like written questions (interrogatories), requests for documents, and sworn oral testimony outside of court (depositions).
Before trial, either side might file motions. A motion to dismiss argues the claim is legally insufficient. A motion for summary judgment asks the court to rule without a trial if key facts are undisputed. If the case isn’t resolved through motions or settlement, it proceeds to trial, where evidence is presented, witnesses testify, and a judge or jury decides the outcome based on the law and evidence. Rules of evidence govern what information the court can consider.
Damages
If slander is proven, a court may award monetary damages to compensate the victim. The type and amount depend on the case specifics, including the statement’s nature, its reach, and the harm caused.
Actual damages, or compensatory damages, aim to restore the victim to their pre-slander position. These include special damages for quantifiable economic losses like lost wages or business opportunities, requiring concrete proof linking the loss to the slander. They also include general damages for non-economic harms like damage to reputation, humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional distress. Calculating general damages is subjective, considering the statement’s severity and impact.
In cases of slander per se (statements considered inherently harmful), harm may be presumed, potentially allowing recovery without proof of specific financial loss. However, legal precedents may limit presumed damages unless “actual malice” is proven, especially in matters of public concern or involving media defendants.4Wikipedia. Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. Without proof of actual malice, recovery might be restricted to compensation for actual injury.
Punitive damages may be awarded in addition to compensatory damages. These are intended to punish the defendant for malicious or particularly reckless behavior and deter future misconduct. Punitive damages typically require proving the defendant acted with actual malice or engaged in outrageous conduct. Their availability can be restricted, and amounts may be subject to constitutional limits.
Defenses
A person accused of slander may raise defenses to avoid liability, even if the statement seems defamatory.
Truth is a fundamental defense. If the statement is factually true, or substantially true, it cannot support a slander claim. The defendant usually bears the burden of proving truth. Minor inaccuracies generally do not negate this defense if the overall assertion is accurate.
Privilege grants immunity in certain situations where open communication is deemed crucial. Absolute privilege provides complete immunity for statements made in specific contexts, such as judicial proceedings, legislative debates, or certain high-level government communications, regardless of malice. Qualified privilege offers limited protection for statements made based on a legal, moral, or social duty to someone with a corresponding interest, like job references or reports to law enforcement. Qualified privilege can be defeated if the plaintiff proves the speaker acted with malice (knowledge of falsity, reckless disregard for truth, or improper purpose).
Statements of opinion are generally protected, unlike false statements of fact.5FindLaw. Defamation and False Statements Under the First Amendment Pure opinions, being subjective, cannot be proven false. Courts examine context and language to determine if a statement implies verifiable facts. Labeling something an “opinion” does not automatically protect it if it implies false factual assertions.
Consent is another defense. If the subject consented to the statement’s publication, they generally cannot sue. Consent must typically be specific and obtained without fraud or duress.
Finally, lawsuits are subject to a statute of limitations, a deadline for filing the case. For defamation, this period is often short, sometimes just one year from when the statement was made. Failing to file within this timeframe usually bars the claim permanently, though limited exceptions may apply.
When to Consult an Attorney
Dealing with potential slander and emotional distress involves legal complexities best navigated with professional guidance. Consulting an attorney experienced in defamation law is advisable.
Strict statutes of limitations impose deadlines for filing lawsuits, often requiring prompt action. An attorney can identify the applicable deadline and ensure timely filing, preventing the claim from being barred.
Assessing whether the harm meets legal thresholds for slander or compensable emotional distress requires careful analysis. An attorney evaluates if the statement constitutes a false assertion of fact, if reputational harm occurred, and if emotional distress is severe enough under legal standards, potentially requiring medical documentation. This assessment helps determine if litigation is worthwhile.
Civil litigation involves complex procedures, from filing documents to managing discovery and court appearances. An attorney guides clients through this process, ensuring compliance with rules and representing their interests effectively.
During an initial consultation, an attorney reviews the facts, explains potential legal options, assesses the likelihood of success, and discusses costs. Bar associations often provide referral services to find qualified attorneys. Seeking legal counsel provides clarity on rights and options, enabling informed decisions about addressing the harm caused.
