Is a person required to prove actual malice to win a defamation claim?

In Texas, a person must generally meet a higher standard of proof if they wish to win a claim of defamation. While general claims of defamation only require a person to prove that the statement was false and caused harm, the Supreme Court of Texas has held that so-called “defamatory per se” statements require proof of actual malice. It is important to remember that actual malice is different from the common phrase “malicious intent.” Actual malice means knowledge that the statement is false or acting with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statement. Therefore, if a statement is “defamatory per se” under Texas law, then the person who is making the claim must prove that the defendant knew the statement was false or acted in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity. If the person is unable to do so, then they will likely not be able to win a claim of defamation in Texas. However, if they are able to prove actual malice, then they may be able to recover damages from the defendant.

Related FAQs

Can a company be sued for defamation?
Is a person allowed to use the defense of privilege in a defamation claim?
Is a person allowed to use an official inquiry as a defense in a defamation lawsuit?
Is an apology considered a defense to a defamation claim?
Are threats considered defamation?
What is the difference between libel and slander in terms of elements?
If a statement is true, is it still considered defamatory?
What is the difference between public and private figures in a defamation claim?
What kinds of statements constitute defamation?
Does a plaintiff have to prove intent in a slander case?

Is a person required to prove actual malice to win a defamation claim?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts