MILWAUKEE DEFAMATION ATTORNEYS WITH A RECORD OF SUCCESS
As the Wisconsin Supreme Court has explained, “[a] person’s reputation and good name is of inestimable value to him and once it has been besmirched by another through carelessness or malice restoration is virtually impossible.” Denny v. Mertz, 106 Wis. 2d 636, 658, 318 N.W.2d 141 (1982). Character assassination has severe consequences, whether the party publishes false statements in writing (libel) or orally (slander).
Defamation is a crime in Wisconsin. Further, if you’ve suffered harm in your personal and professional life due to allegedly defamatory statements, you are entitled to seek compensation. However, defamation cases can be notoriously difficult to win, and a defamation lawsuit that isn’t handled with care could end up doing even more damage to your reputation.
The best way to protect yourself is to confidentially discuss your legal options with an experienced defamation lawyer. Whether you are the victim of character assassination, someone is pirating the use of your name and goodwill, or you’ve been accused of attempting to harm another’s reputation, our defamation attorneys are here to assist.
What Is Defamation?
Under Wisconsin law (WI Stat § 895.05), there are three essential elements to a defamation claim. The statement or communication must be:
- False. If the accusations are true, then they are not defamation.
- Communicated to someone other than the person defamed. This could be a potential business partner, media reporter, etc.
- Harmful to your reputation. In other words, the statement would reasonably have the effect of deterring other people from associating with you personally or professionally.
Defamation can be divided into two broad categories: slander and libel. Slander involves defamatory statements that are spoken to others, while libel covers defamatory statements that are published in writing or transmitted through electronic means. Although libel and slander were historically treated differently, the two torts have since merged into a single claim for defamation.
Common Challenges in Defamation Cases
While the definition of defamation makes it seem like these cases should be fairly straightforward, there are several significant legal and evidentiary burdens that must be overcome in a typical case. These include:
Proving falsity. The plaintiff has the burden of proving that the allegedly defamatory statement is false. This can be challenging for opinion-based statements.
Identifying defendants. If libel is published anonymously, who do you sue? Furthermore, under Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code, online platforms are generally immune from lawsuits—you must go after individuals who posted defamatory content.
Proving damages. In most cases, you’ll need to show quantifiable losses (such as lost business opportunities, canceled contracts, etc.) directly attributable to the reputational harm you suffered. Accurately calculating these damages and proving that they were lost due to defamation (rather than any other reason) can be extremely difficult.
Actual malice standard. In cases involving public figures or free speech on matters of public interest, it may not be enough to prove that the communication was false. You will additionally need to prove that the defendant knew that the statement was false, or acted with reckless disregard to whether it was true or not.
Other Legal Considerations in Wisconsin Defamation Cases
The focus of any defamation suit is on the nature and harmful effect of the defamatory communication. Certain categories of defamatory statements can even be pursued without concrete, quantifiable harm.
That said, a party asserting a defamation claim necessarily places its reputation on trial, which allows the defendant to prove that the “gist” of the alleged defamatory statement is true—a complete defense to a defamation action. In other words, only false statements are actionable; if the statements have a kernel of truth to them, no matter how salacious the story, the plaintiff will lose and may actually do more harm to their reputation in the process.
Of course, defendants are not immune from maliciously disseminating harmful information about another, even if there is a kernel of truth to their statements. The Wisconsin Legislature has declared a public policy interest in protecting the reputations of its citizens, which is why it has enacted numerous statutes—some of which carry severe penalties—to protect against character assassination. See, e.g., Wis. Stat. § 134.01 (imposing civil and criminal liability on conspiracies to assassinate another’s reputation); see also Wis. Stat. § 942.03 (imposing criminal liability for furnishing false information to the public).
Similarly, Wisconsin’s “right to privacy” statute vests plaintiffs with a civil cause of action when their right to privacy is violated, such as through a defendant’s dissemination of confidential information about the plaintiff that is not in the public sphere. See Wis. Stat. § 995.50. The legislature also created a civil cause of action to remedy the unauthorized use of an entity’s name, which also imposes punitive measures on those who violate the statute. Wis. Stat. § 943.203. In adopting these statutes, the Wisconsin Legislature armed victims of character assassination with numerous remedies to repair their tarnished reputations.
Representative Matters:
- Represented victim of defamation relative to a series of untrue social media posts and obtained permanent injunction as well as state-record verdict in the amount of $2.4 million for compensatory and punitive damages.
- Lead counsel for a veterinarian clinic that sued numerous defendants who conspired to assassinate the clinic’s reputation by posting negative, defamatory Google reviews despite never having used the clinic’s services. Lakeview Animal Clinic, S.C. v. Gnatzig et al., Case No. 2019-CV-001418 (Waukesha County Circuit Court).
- Secured dismissal of all claims against Milwaukee Brewer, Ryan Braun, in a lawsuit against his former friend who asserted claims for defamation, breach of contract, and fraud. See Sasson v. Braun, 2015 WI App 58, review denied, 2016 WI 2.
- Represented the plaintiff in a defamation and business torts case against Carfax, Inc.; following the court’s denial of Carfax’s motion to dismiss, see 2012 WL 2597915, the parties engaged in extensive discovery and the case settled under favorable terms to the client. See Experian Info. Sols., Inc. v. Carfax, Inc., Case No. 11 CV 08927 (N.D. Ill.).