Can I be sued?

[AliTheGreatest]

On facebook, I posted a message that said "the superintendent of my old school is a drunk." Can I be sued? I know they are probably going to ban me from school property forever but can they take me to court?

 

[army judge]

First of all, it has to be proven that YOU posted the message. Yes, anyone can be sued by anyone else. If you SHUT your mouth and say NOTHING more, most likely you'd prevail if you were sued. Let them prove what you did (if anything) and stop saying that you did anything!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jenelle]

also you didn't call any names.. and if you did for it to count as defamation of character, firstly what you said have to be an exaggeration of the truth..so u are good..

 

[jharris352]

You are unlikely to be sued. For defamation they have to prove that YOU did it, that it is a lie, and that someone believed him AND caused him damages if you are sued per quod in stead of per se. Per se defamation is where you slander his work, and that may be what you have done. I doubt you will be sued.

 

[john39]

For defamation they have to prove that YOU did it, that it is a lie,...

I am not a lawyer,but,do they really have to prove it is a lie?

Where is onus probandi ?It is a general rule that the party who alleges the affirmative of any proposition should prove it.

Yes,in per quod the context of the words determine the defamatory statement,meaning the plaintiff introduces additional facts to show defamation,to explain why the statement should be considered defamatory if it were not true
In per quod the defamatory character of the statement is not apparent on its face, and extrinsic facts are required to explain its defamatory meaning." Kolegas v. Heftel Broadcasting Corp., 607 N.E.2d 201, 206 (Ill. 1992) In per se certain statements are presumed defamatory, thus no need to explain why

In per quod Plaintiff claims special damages,as compared to defamation per se where the damages are presumed.....,but ,the onus probandi does not change,does it?It is the same as in pro se,is it not?

The one who was sued has to prove that what he alleged was true.Of course,truth is absolute defense against the suit.

Why the general rule of onus probandi does not apply in per quod defamation claim?