301 Massachusetts Avenue
Indianapolis, IN 46204

Blog Archive

One of things that make the United States great is the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. We have a right to review, post, comment, web site, Facebook post or comment, Twitter tweet or other on-line statement. If you are being wrongfully accused of internet defamation, you need a lawyer who specializes in internet defamation legal matters to understand what it will take and what it will cost to defend your case.

In many ways, courts treat defamation on the internet similar to off-line defamation. Because internet defamation is by definition written rather than oral, it is technically internet libel. Libel is Defamation which is written such as on a web site. Most on-line defamation occurs through libel by posting on Yelp, Twitter, Google Plus, and Facebook, website comment, bulletin board post, business review, rating or blog post.
In order for defamation to occur, false statements need to be made towards another person that causes emotional distress or financial harm to the individual mentioned. Defamation can come in all forms of media ranging from oral statements to statements published online. One type of defamation that is very common within the U.S. is when statements are made accusing or questioning the professional status of an individual. This type of defamation is highly damaging to a professional’s business, and the harmed individual can easily recover damages without specific proof of damage to their business due to Indiana’s laws of defamation per se.

However, there are other situations were suing for defamation isn’t quite as easy as the scenario listed above. In other cases, suing for defamation can be exceptionally difficult to win because not all negative statements are defined as defamatory. Statements made in the perspective of an individuals opinion does not qualify as defamatory because it is stated as the individuals entitled opinion of your business. Having phrases like “I think” or “I believe” before a negative statement usually does not warrant the term defamation and will require proof of material harm in order to get recovery for the statements made. This scenario of possible defamation falls under defamation per quod and it is very hard to receive damages for these types of statements.
Defamation occurs through statements made either orally or in print in a newspaper, magazine, online, or other printed sources. By legal definition, defamation is false statements or communications concerning another person that causes emotional or financial harm to the individual discussed. A common type of defamation our law firm encounters often are statements made accusing or questioning the professional status of an individual. This type of defamation is considered highly damaging and is recoverable without proof of damages due to Indiana’s laws concerning defamation per se. However in other situations, suing for defamation can be extremely hard because not all statements that are negative are considered defamatory. For example, when someone says, “I think” before a negative statement, it usually is his or her opinion and does not qualify as defamatory. In these situations, defamation per quod comes into play and requires proof of material harm in order to get recovery for the defamatory statements made.

If you believe your situation is not the latter type of opinion based statements and you want to protect your reputation from harm, it is highly suggested to contact a law firm to help fight these statements and get recovery for them. At Riley Williams & Piatt, we are experts in defamation lawsuits and can help you fight in court to fix your harmed reputation. Our law firm has an impressive record of success in cases involving injury to one’s reputation and our firm has accumulated more than $15 million for clients in these types of cases. We even have had one of the largest defamation verdicts in Indiana history.

Suing for defamation can be extremely hard lawsuit to battle. According to dictionary.com, defamation is “false or unjustified injury of the good reputation of another, as by slander or libel”. Defamation can be spoken as slander or written as libel. We live in a country where freedom of speech is a crucial part of every person’s rights, but when their speech include false statements that will damage others emotionally or financially this becomes a major legal problem. However, not all statements that are negative are defamatory. For example, when someone says “I think” before a negative statement, it usually is their opinion and does not qualify as defamatory.

There are many reasons why one should seek a personal injury attorney.

“Defamation” is a term which covers the ways a false statement made about someone can damage their reputation. These types of cases can also be referred to as “defamation of character” or “disparagement”. In Indianapolis & Indiana, defamation usually comes in the form or Libel or Slander. The difference is simple: A defamatory remark is considered Libel if it is in written form, and is considered slander if it was spoken. Trade Libel means any form of defamation that has direct impact on one’s business or occupation. Indiana defamation lawyers can help you make this distinction if you are unsure, as in some scenarios the distinction could become less clear (like with internet defamation, for example).

In Indiana defamation per se also comes into play. Defamation per se refers to any publication or statement that is inherently defamatory – so the victim does not need to prove material damage, because the damage can be easily presumed. For example, statements related to a plaintiff’s sexual conduct, insisting the plaintiff has a contagious disease, has committed a criminal act, or engaged in professional misconduct are all defamatory by themselves, and harm to one’s reputation is inherent in the statement. Conversely, defamation cases in Indiana can also be considered per quod, which is essentially the opposite of per se. Defamation per quod requires a defendant to prove the material harm incurred as a result of given statements, as the harm is not considered obvious.