Wrongful Statements Made Injured Their Profession And Reputation

1716 WordsOct 2, 20167 Pages
Plaintiff can establish slander per se by showing that the defamatory statements made injured their profession and reputation while drawing question to a particular skill necessary for proper conduct. However, allegations of plaintiff’s character do not meet slander per se. Joseph E. Hancock v. Easwaran P. Variyam, 400 S.W.3d 59 (14th Dist. 2016). To be actionable as slander per se, criminal allegations must be in accordance with the elements of criminal statues of the state, simply stating that plaintiff stole is not sufficient. Skillern v. Brookshire Et Al., 58 S.W. 2d 544 (Tex. Civ. App. 1933). For a statement to be slander per se, it must not use an innuendo to interpret the meaning of the statement and insults are not considered as outrageous behavior. David E. Moore v. Billy Waldrop, 166 S.W.3d 380 (5th Cir. 2006). Words which charge an employee with dishonesty in dealing with his employer are held as slander per se and injury to reputation is presumed. W.R. Tatum v. Carolyn Liner, 749 S.W.2d 251 (N.D. Tex. 2007). However, proof of malice is not required to entitle the plaintiff to actual damages in a slander per se case but the presumption of malice may be rebutted. W.R. Tatum. Privilege is an exception to slander per se but it can be destroyed when it is abused by the individual claiming it. W.R. Tatum A person who is accused of the elements of the crime of theft may be portrayed in the light of that crime without any evidence. Skillern. In Skillern, the plaintiff
Open Document