California First-Year Law Students' Exam (Baby Bar) — MCTortsMedium
A local newspaper published an article falsely stating that Dr. Evelyn Reed, a renowned surgeon, had been found guilty of Medicare fraud. The newspaper acted negligently in failing to verify the information, which came from an unreliable source. Dr. Reed sued the newspaper for defamation. Assuming Dr. Reed is a private figure, which of the following elements must she prove to recover damages?
- AActual malice, falsity, and damages.
- BFalsity, publication, and actual malice.
- CNegligence, falsity, and damages.
- DPublication, falsity, and severe emotional distress.
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: C. Negligence, falsity, and damages.
For a private figure plaintiff in a defamation case involving a matter of public concern, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with at least negligence regarding the falsity of the statement, in addition to proving falsity and damages.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. Actual malice is required for public figures, not private figures, unless the statement is about a matter of purely private concern.
- B. Actual malice is not the standard of fault for a private figure in this context.
- D. Severe emotional distress is not a required element for defamation; general damages for reputational harm are sufficient.
Defamation: Private Figure Standard
When a private figure is defamed on a matter of public concern, the plaintiff generally must prove falsity, publication, and that the defendant acted with at least negligence as to the falsity.
- Private figure plaintiffs have a lower burden of proof than public figures.
- Negligence is the typical fault standard for private figures.
- Actual malice is not required unless punitive damages are sought or the matter is purely private.
Memory trick: Defamation needs a 'Foul, Published, False, Faulty, Damaging' statement.