Legal Question in Civil Rights Law in New York

Re: Options for dealing with someone who is harassing me

Speaking untruths about another with the intent to harm that person is slander. Writing such words is libel.

You may have a slander suit, but the usual problem with such a suit is the inability to prove economic loss as a result. If you have no economic loss, you have an incomplete lawsuit which ultimately cannot be maintained.

My advice is to quit the volunteer group and distance yourself from your antagonist as quickly and completely as possible. Removing yourself from the situation could end the problem.

Re: Options for dealing with someone who is harassing me

While Mr. Aspinwall offers sound advice, he is not 100% correct on the law regarding damages. Both slander and libel fall under a general category called defamation. There are two types of defamation: (1) defamation per se and (2) defamation per quad. For purposes of this response, I will focus on the former.

Statements disparaging the trade, business, or professional reputation of a person or organization or alleging a person or organization committed a "serious" crime constitute defamatory per se. Liberman v. Gelstein, 80 N.Y.2d 429, 435, 590 N.Y.S.2d 857, 605 N.E.2d 344 (1992); Harris v. Hirsh, 228 A.D.2d 206, 209, 643 N.Y.S.2d 556 (1st Dep't 1996); Clemente v. Impastato, 274 A.D.2d 771, 774, 711 N.Y.S.2d 71 (3d Dep't 2000). Defamation per se is not mere comment on character; rather, the comment must disparage "professional ability" by alleging "improper performance of ... duties or unprofessional conduct." Id. at 773, 711 N.Y.S.2d 71 (citation omitted). See Golub v. Enquirer/Star Group, 89 N.Y.2d 1074, 1076, 659 N.Y.S.2d 836, 681 N.E.2d 1282 (1997); Harris v. Hirsh, 228 A.D.2d at 208, 643 N.Y.S.2d 556. If a plaintiff proved defamation per se, he would not need to prove injury to his reputation or special damages, "the loss of something having economic or pecuniary value . . . directly from the injury to reputation caused by the defamation." Matherson v. Marchello, 100 A.D.2d 233, 235, 473 N.Y.S.2d 998 (2d Dep't 1984) (citation omitted). See Liberman v. Gelstein, 80 N.Y.2d at 434-35, 590 N.Y.S.2d 857, 605 N.E.2d 344. When a statement falsely attacks the basic integrity or reputation of a business, businessperson, or professional, the law presumes the statement is defamatory and causes injury. Ruder & Finn v. Seaboard Sur. Co., 52 N.Y.2d 663, 670, 439 N.Y.S.2d 858, 422 N.E.2d 518 (1981); Chiavarelli v. Williams, 256 A.D.2d 111, 113, 681 N.Y.S.2d 276 (1st Dep't 1998); Langenbacher Co. v. Tolksdorf, 199 A.D.2d 64, 65, 605 N.Y.S.2d 34 (1st Dep't 1993). A "presumption of actual damage to reputation arises from the statement itself entitling plaintiff to recover general damages." Gallo v. Montauk Video, 178 Misc.2d 1069, 1070, 684 N.Y.S.2d 817 (App. Term 2d Dep't 1998).

Thus, false statements regarding your performance as president of your organization may very well constitute damage to your business reputation, for which damages would be presumed. Thus, conceivably you could be awarded nominal damages of, say, $1.00 if you couldn't prove actual damages.

Of course, to prosecute such an action, you would still need to hire an attorney and, therefore, as a practical matter you might not want to do so, since no reasonable attorney would accept the representation on a contingent fee basis.

-- Kenneth J. Ashman; Ashman Law Offices, LLC, 156 W. 56th Street, Suite 1902, New York, NY 10019; [email protected]; www.lawyers.com/alo