A public officer must show that alleged false statements concerning him or her were made with actual malice to recover damages for defamation

To contact us Click HERE
A public officer must show that alleged false statements concerning him or her were made with actual malice to recover damages for defamation
Watson v Jamestown, 56 AD3d 1289

Michael J. Watson, a police officer, sued a number of police departmentofficials, alleging, among other alleged wrongdoing, defamation.

Supreme Court granted summary judgmentdismissing Watson’s complaints. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’saction.

Addressing Watson’s claim of defamation, the Appellate Division noted that"A public official [as a police officer, Watson was a public officer] maynot recover damages for defamation unless the official proves that theoffending false statement was made with actual malice -- that is, withknowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was falseor not," citing Freeman v Johnston, 84 NY2d 52.

In this instance, said the court, theofficials being sued established “their entitlement to judgment as a matter oflaw with respect to that cause of action by demonstrating that the remarks thatallegedly defamed [Watson] were true with the exception of one remark that wasa misstatement but was not made with malice.”

The decision is posted on the Internet at:
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2008/2008_09231.htm