Also known as: actions on the case for words · slander · defamatory words action
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A common-law tort action for slander allowing recovery for defamatory statements published to third parties. Recovery is available without proof of special harm when the statement imputes a serious crime, a loathsome disease, serious sexual misconduct, or unfitness for a business, trade, or profession. Otherwise special harm must be shown.
Adrian Aguilar told colleagues at a professional gathering that Anika Anand had committed theft from a prior employer. The statement reached several attendees who then avoided business dealings with Anand. Anand sued Aguilar under the action on the case for words and recovered without proving specific dollar losses because the accusation imputed criminal conduct.
Anthony Arnold told clients that Alice Atkins suffered from a highly contagious skin condition that made her unfit to handle their accounts. Several clients withdrew their business. Atkins brought an action on the case for words and prevailed without showing exact financial figures because the statement imputed a loathsome disease.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Anita Ali posted that Andrew Avery routinely falsified engineering reports to secure contracts. Several potential clients canceled meetings with Avery after reading the post. Avery sued under the action on the case for words and recovered without proving special damages because the statement attacked his fitness for his profession.
Adrian Aguilar told coworkers that Anika Anand had engaged in serious sexual misconduct with a subordinate. The rumor spread through the office and damaged Anand's standing with supervisors. Anand recovered under the action on the case for words without proving concrete economic loss because the statement imputed serious sexual misconduct.
Anthony Arnold falsely told a trade group that Alice Atkins had stolen trade secrets. The statement was published to several members but caused no measurable loss. Atkins prevailed in her action on the case for words and received nominal damages even though she proved no actual economic harm.
Anita Ali told a coworker that Andrew Avery had falsified safety data. The coworker repeated the claim to a client who then terminated a contract with Avery. Avery recovered special damages in his action on the case for words because the repetition was a foreseeable result of the original publication.
The plaintiff must show a false statement published to a third party that caused special harm or fell within a category of statements actionable without proof of special harm. The statement must also have been made with the requisite fault.
Special harm is not required when the statement imputes a serious crime, a loathsome disease, serious sexual misconduct, or conduct that adversely affects fitness for a business or profession.
The action historically focused on pecuniary loss from false statements and developed into the tort of injurious falsehood. Modern defamation actions often presume harm for certain statements and protect reputational interests more broadly.
Yes. When the statement is actionable per se, the plaintiff may recover at least nominal damages even without proof of actual harm.
Yes, if the repetition was privileged, authorized, or intended by the original publisher, the original defendant remains liable for the resulting special harm.
…extremely powerful antidote to the inducement to media self-censorship of the common-law rule of strict liability for libel and slander. And it exacts a correspondingly high price from the victims of defamatory falsehood. Plainly many deserving plaintiffs, including some intentionally subjected to injury, will be unable to…