What is the difference between defamation per se and defamation per quod?

Defamation law in Virginia is intended to protect a person’s reputation from untrue or damaging statements. Defamation is broken down into two categories - defamation per se and defamation per quod. The difference between these two types of defamation boils down to how the statement was presented. Defamation per se is a statement that is considered damaging without any additional explanation and is often viewed as the more serious type of defamation. This type of statement is typically considered to be damaging to one’s reputation without any additional clarification or context. Examples of defamation per se include accusing someone of a crime, alleging someone is incompetent in their profession, or claiming someone has a loathsome disease. Defamation per quod is a statement that requires additional evidence to be considered damaging. This type of statement often involves a false statement that can be explained away or discredited. For example, someone claiming that another person is guilty of a crime when they were only charged but not found guilty could be considered defamation per quod. In Virginia, an individual must be able to prove that they suffered harm in order to seek legal recourse for defamation. If a statement is considered defamation per se, the person does not need to provide further evidence of damages as the statement itself is seen to be damaging. However, if a statement is considered defamation per quod, the individual must prove actual damages in order to seek legal action.

Related FAQs

Are comments made on online forums considered defamation?
Are Internet service providers held liable for defamatory content published on their networks?
Is a person required to notify the other party before filing a defamation lawsuit?
Does a person have to prove intent in a defamation lawsuit?
What kinds of statements constitute defamation?
Is a person required to sue for defamation in the state where the statement was made?
What happens in a defamation case if the defendant does not have sufficient assets?
Does a person have to establish a special standard of malice to win a defamation claim?
Does a person have to prove that the defendant knew or should have known the statement was false?
What is the difference between libel and slander in terms of elements?

What is the difference between defamation per se and defamation per quod?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts