Can I Sign Missouri Cease and Desist Letter

Can i document type sign cease and desist letter missouri

it's time to talk about liars defamation slander and libel all encompass a deceptively simple area of law now this video is going to dive deep into the law we're gonna dive deep into some examples and the very end of the video will cover the damages that you might be entitled to if you successfully pursue a defamation claim now this video primarily focuses on workplace defamation in the state of California however defamation is relatively ubiquitous from state to state so even if you're not in California and even if your situation isn't a workplace situation this video will still be educational but as always contact a lawyer in your state for specific legal advice do not rely on this video for legal advice that would be stupid okay from a lay person's perspective defamation generally just means that there's a lie being told and if you're the victim the lies being told about you now as you can imagine the law is far more specific than what we just typically think of defamation so let's cover some basics first of all slander and libel are just different types of defamation defamation is the umbrella term for this area of law so before we get into the specifics of what slander and libel are let's first really get an idea of what defamation is according to California law defamation typically consists of five different elements which will define more here in a minute but let's just go through them ah number one the bad guy made the defamatory statement the false statement to at least one other person meaning he or she didn't just say the mean thing or the false thing to the victim they actually published it to somebody else too the statement was a false statement of fact not opinion this is super important again we're gonna talk more about that in just a second three the hearer of the statement must understand what it means and who it's about ie the victim for it has to cause damage to plaintiff's reputation now some of these damages are usually assumed but not always and five and this is important that the damage that the employee is complaining about was actually caused causation by the false statement of fact and not by something else come on libel being the written form of defamation obviously would require those five elements we just discussed but California Civil Code section 45 gives us an additional insight it says that the false statement of fact I mean the defamatory statement must expose plaintiff to hatred contempt ridicule or obloquy I have no idea to say that opera cream or causes plaintiff to be shunned or avoided or has a tendency to injure the plaintiff remember we're talking about the employee usually in his or her occupation obviously that last subsection applies a lot in employment cases slander being the spoken or verbal form of defamation also requires those five elements under the general defamation category that we discussed a minute ago but California Civil Code section 46 now gives us some additional insight as well it says slander charges plaintiff with a crime loathsome disease impotence or want of chasity or tends directly to injure him or her in his or her occupation so the verbal false statement of fact must do one of those things alright let's try to make some sense of all this lawyer gobbledygook let's first figure out this fact versus opinion thing remember defamation requires a false statement of fact not opinion so what's the difference well you and I both know the difference between effect and an opinion but the court really refines that by saying that a fact is something that you can prove true or false whereas an opinion is something that's far more subjective that you can't prove or false okay so let's figure this out with an example say for an example your supervisor put in your performance evaluation which led to your termination that you were a poor performer I'm pretty sure that any court in California would hold poor performer to be an opinion and not a fact so you would lose that defamation case like 100 times out of 100 on the other hand let's say the supervisor put in an email we're gonna terminate John Smith ie you because he embezzled a hundred thousand dollars or he miss quoted a bid by a hundred thousand dollars now that is a fact as a statement of fact that you should be able to prove true or false with documentation and eyewitness testimony ok now I will say it's very very rare that you would be able to win based on something that is said in a performance evaluation about you because courts almost automatically hold anything set in a performance evaluation to be an opinion so be careful if that's the foundation of your case remember earlier when I said that the false statement has to be communicated or published to a third person this is the publication requirement and here's what it means all this element requires is that the false thing being said about you is communicated to a third person it cannot just be said to you by the bad guy it has to be communicated to somebody else now this can be done verbally or in writing it can be done to one person it can be done to five hundred people all the element requires is that the lie being told about you is told to somebody else if you're the owner of a company or you're the manager or in HR you might be curious well hey wait a minute can the company be liable for a defamatory statement made by a supervisor or an employee underneath well the answer is yes the company can be vicariously liable for the actions of employees or supervisors if those actions were done in the course in scope of their employment so if the employee is on the clock or doing job duties when they make the defamatory statement likely the employer would be liable on the other hand if the defamatory statement is made when the dudes at the bar with his buddies and has nothing to do with work the answer is probably not it's not a rush or anything right to really understand defamation you need to understand the defenses against it and in the context of employment law there's really only two number one is truth right the cheesy saying goes that the truth will set you free well in defamation that's totally true right defamation requires a false statement of fact so if the employer shows that the statement was in fact true your defamation case is totally toast number two and this is where most employment defamation cases go to die and that's called privilege the term privilege is super confusing to non lawyers so let me make it simple a privilege is a right to do something without legal consequence okay so in the context of defamation the employer has a privilege and that privilege says that employers can say false things about employees so long as it's being said without malice and it's being communicated to people who have a common interest in the subject matter of that communication okay so there's two main components of this privilege without malice and it's communicated to somebody who has a common interest in this subject matter of that information so let's unpack both of those now in order for an employee victim to show that this privilege does not apply you have to show that the false statement of fact was made with malice okay so how do you do that well the court has identified one of two elements either one you show that the bad guy just absolutely hated you had ill-will towards you that's difficult to do but possible or two you have to show that the bad guy lacked all reasonable grounds to believe that the publication was true and therefore acted in reckless disregard to the employees rights so you have to show basically that the person either hated your guts which isn't easy to do unless you've got great evidence or two that the bad guy was just a total buffoon with respect to the truth also pretty difficult to show in a court of law the best way to explain the common interest portion of the privilege is to use an example there was a case where a truck driver was fired for falsifying his time cards and driving Locke then the employer told all the other employees that's why the guy was fired so he sued for defamation and then the court threw out the case based on this privilege and the reason why it threw doubt is it because it said that the employer and the other employees had a common interest in knowing why and in discussing the reasons for termination if you falsify your time records based on that example you can use your imagination to see how courts or judges can liberally apply this privilege to basically encompass almost any type of communication so that's why I said earlier that this is where a lot of defamation claims go to die what about the situation where you're looking for a job and you apply to a company and they ask your old company for information and then the old company gives false information and thereby the new company doesn't hire you can you sue them for defamation yes but it's really well established that the privilege applies in those situations so you likely wouldn't win a defamation claim however the California Labor Code section 1 zero-five-zero outlines some pretty gnarly stuff against employers if they make misrepresentations to prospective employers and it includes triple damages so don't do it employers just reveal the dates of employment and move on don't say anything negative about your former employees let's quickly talk about the statute of limitations as you probably know every lawsuit has a time limit if you don't file within that time limit poof you lose your right to that lawsuit defamation claims in California have a 1-year statute of limitations so as soon as you find out about the defamatory statement made about you call a lawyer don't wait 365 days before you call a lawyer that's if you're the victim of defamation what kind of damages can you get any lawsuit well every case is different so the amount that you will get depends on a variety of factors it is impossible to predict without knowing about your individual case it all depends upon the judge the jury the lawyers the facts of the case and the behavior of the bad guy but the types of remedies that are available - well there's four number one are your lost wages in most employment cases in defamation you either lost a job because of defamatory statements or you didn't get hired because of a defamatory statement in both those scenarios you don't get wages because you're out of work and those add up number two are punitive damages now these are rare and it depends upon how good your case is and how good your lawyer is but basically these are exemplary damages meant to punish the bad guys for such bad behavior the third type of damage are pain and suffering damages these are the anguish the emotional duress that people go through as a result of the bad behavior and while the general public thinks that that's kind of silly these damages are very very real and if you've been a victim a serious victim not one of these people looking just to try to make a couple thousand dollars but a serious victim of defamation or are these other employment harms now you know what I'm talking about and finally you can get interest and costs back of pursuing the case so that's the general gist of defamation I hope you found this video helpful if you need a lawyer and you're in California don't be afraid to give my office a call there's a lot of other good employment lawyers in the state of California but don't sit on your rights contact a lawyer as soon as you can all right take care I'm tired of talking you