Also known as: private figure plaintiff · private-figure plaintiffs · private figure plaintiffs · private plaintiff · private-figure defamation plaintiff
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A plaintiff in a defamation action who is neither a public official nor a public figure. Such a plaintiff must prove falsity when the speech involves matters of public concern but need not prove actual malice to recover compensatory damages.
Paula Pierce, a local business owner, sued a newspaper after it published false statements about her company's practices. The court permitted Paula to establish falsity in her defamation claim because the application was fair to the defendant under all circumstances.
Patrick Phan, a private citizen running a small store, sued a media company after an article accused him of overcharging customers on a matter of public concern. The court required Patrick to prove the statements were false rather than presuming falsity. Without that showing, his defamation claim failed even though the statements damaged his reputation.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Pamela Phillips, a local teacher not involved in any public controversy, sued a broadcaster after a report falsely claimed she neglected her students. Because Pamela remained a private-figure plaintiff, the court applied a negligence standard rather than actual malice. She recovered compensatory damages upon showing the broadcaster failed to verify basic facts.
Priya Prasad, a neighborhood resident uninvolved in public affairs, sued a publisher after an article falsely labeled her a fraud. As a private-figure plaintiff on a matter of public concern, Priya had to prove actual malice to obtain presumed or punitive damages. The court denied those damages when she showed only negligence.
Phoebe Park, a private investor, sued a financial newsletter after it published false statements about her business dealings on a matter of public concern. The court required Phoebe to plead facts supporting falsity and fault. Her complaint survived dismissal because it alleged specific, verifiable inaccuracies and the publisher's failure to check sources.
Pilar Pena, a local contractor with no public profile, sued a credit reporting agency after it published a false report harming her business reputation. Because the speech did not involve public concern, Pilar could recover presumed and punitive damages without proving actual malice. The court permitted the award upon a showing of common-law malice.
A private-figure plaintiff must prove that the defamatory statements are false. The First Amendment displaces the common-law presumption of falsity to avoid deterring true speech on public issues.
Supporting sources
A private-figure plaintiff may recover presumed or punitive damages without proving actual malice when the speech does not involve a matter of public concern. When the speech does involve public concern, actual malice is required for those damages.
Supporting sources
A private-figure plaintiff need not prove actual malice to recover compensatory damages. A public official must prove actual malice by clear and convincing evidence even for compensatory damages.
Supporting sources
…of state concern than public persons with more access to the media to defend themselves. It therefore refuses to condition the private plaintiff's recovery on a showing of intentional or reckless falsehood as required by New York Times . But the Court nevertheless extends the reach of the First Amendment to all defamation actions…