- Joined
- May 4, 2020
That statement also was made upon the advice of a lawyer which generally is bar to criminal and civil liability (with some exceptions and if invoked may require you to waive your attorney-client privilege)ETA: Whether Russ has plausibly pleaded any of these is another matter entirely and I am tempted to say he has not - like useful mistake pointed out a statement cannot be defamatory unless it is made to a third party;
Additionally, in Nevada (where this lawsuit is at), defamation lawsuits are made of four prongs:
"(1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) an unprivileged publication to a third person; (3) fault, amounting to at least negligence; and (4) actual or presumed damages." As it relates to prong three, "There are two standards of fault depending on whether the subject of a statement is a public figure or a private figure. Public figures or limited-purpose public figures are subject to the actual malice standard under New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). Private plaintiff's must only show negligence." If Russ is a public figure as he alleges in his lawsuit against KF, then this fails outright. If Russ is instead a private person then "[he] must demonstrate the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care in determining the truth or falsity of the alleged defamatory statement before publishing it." - Nigam v. Ahmad, No. 86901-COA (Nev. Ct. App. Dec. 19, 2024)
Consulting a lawyer about whether or not a crime has been committed upon you certainly shows that you attempted to determine the validity of your opinion.
There's also more problems. It isn't clear out of the gate that a false statement was even made. As well, I'm not sure what damages are there to recover. Certainly for defamation per se claims, damages are presumed, but just as with prong two, no person with a great opinion of Russ ever heard that statement until Russ himself published it in this lawsuit.
Last edited: