Also known as: actionable per-se · per se actionable
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Defamatory statements that the law treats as inherently harmful. Recovery is permitted without allegation or proof of special damages because injury to reputation is presumed from the nature of the words themselves.
Anthony Arnold told several parents that teacher Adrian Aguilar had been disciplined for inappropriately touching students. Aguilar sued for defamation and showed only that colleagues now avoided him. Because the accusation imputed serious misconduct incompatible with his profession, the statement was actionable per se and Aguilar recovered without proving any economic loss.
Austin Abbott published a newspaper article falsely stating that Alexis Archer routinely fabricated witness affidavits in her law practice. Archer proved the statement was false and defamatory but could not identify any lost clients. Because the publication was libel, it was actionable per se and Archer recovered at least nominal damages.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Adam Anderson told recruiters that rival developer Andrew Avery had an incurable contagious disease. Avery proved the statement was false and that several recruiters stopped returning his calls. Because the accusation imputed a loathsome disease, the slander was actionable per se and Avery recovered both general and special damages.
A spoken statement is slander actionable per se when it falls into one of four traditional categories: imputing a serious crime, a loathsome disease, conduct incompatible with the plaintiff's business or profession, or serious sexual misconduct. In those cases the plaintiff recovers without proving special damages.
Yes. Written defamation is libel and is actionable per se at common law. The plaintiff need only prove falsity, publication, and defamatory character. General damages for reputational harm are presumed.
The defendant is liable for at least nominal damages. The plaintiff may also recover general damages for presumed reputational harm and any proved special harm that was legally caused by the publication.
Actionable per se statements are defamatory on their face and permit recovery without special damages. Actionable per quod statements require the plaintiff to plead and prove special damages because the defamatory meaning depends on extrinsic facts.
…charge T. 22 given because of the plaintiff’s failure to plead or prove special damages. In libel action, where the words are actionable per se, the complaint need not specify damages ( Johnson v. Robertson , 8 Port. 486), nor is proof of pecuniary injury required, such injury being implied. Johnson Publishing Co. v. Davis ,…