Need clarification: The questions that you will be asked at trial? Or, the questions that are the basis of the libel and slander action?
Potential legal charges for slander include defamation, libel, and false light. These charges can result in civil lawsuits where the person making false statements can be held liable for damages. In some cases, criminal charges may also apply, depending on the severity of the slanderous statements.
Most statements made by counsel can be considered by jurors as evidence. In some cases, the judge will instruct you whether you should listen and consider this as evidence or not.
The limits for civil law suits is 3 years in Michigan. The time limit for libel or slander is only 1 year. In most cases defamation would be considered libel or slander.
Yes, it is possible to sue someone in small claims court for slander. You would need to prove that the person made false and damaging statements about you. Small claims court typically handles cases involving monetary compensation for damages rather than injunctions or specific performance.
A person who is libeled can potentially sue the individual or entity responsible for publishing false and damaging statements about them. The person may seek damages for harm to their reputation and emotional distress caused by the libelous statements. In some cases, the libeler may also face criminal charges.
The punishment for slander can vary depending on the jurisdiction, but it often involves civil penalties such as fines or damages awarded to the victim. In some cases, slander can also be considered a criminal offense, leading to potential imprisonment or other legal consequences.
Not if you are telling the truth. And you have to be able to prove it is the truth. Think about what you would say in a court of law under oath.And note that you can still be charged with libel, they just won't be able to win, as truth is a defense in libel and slander cases.
Typically defamation (slander/libel) type charges are, in the US are always torts, and very rarely criminal in most other countries. As a tort they have no sentence, only damages to be paid. However in many cases a judge can issue an injunction against the behavior and if that is ignored, the personal can be tried criminally for it's violation.
No, not in every case. There are two major differences. One is where the statements made are privileged under the First Amendment and the other is where the defamation is considered defamation per se. There is a First Amendment privilege governing statements made about public figures, especially statements by news sources. Ordinarily, malice on the part of the defamer is assumed if the statements are defamatory in nature. But in matters of public figures, the plaintiff has to prove actual malice. This requirement is designed to balance the interests of people in their right not to be defamed against the First Amendment guarantee of a free press. Another difference is when the defamation constitutes "libel or slander per se." Certain statements like accusation of commission of a crime are considered libel/slander per se. That means it is assumed that the defamed person suffered some injury to reputation, so the plaintiff does not have to that his or her reputation actually suffered. In all other cases, a plaintiff must prove that injury. Note that different states may have different standards as to what the formal elements of a defamation action are. Thus it is also possible that plaintiffs might have to prove different elements simply because of the particular state where the defamation occurred.
Fines are only levied in criminal cases. Slander is a civil suit and no fine or jail time can be imposed. However the person who was slandered could be awarded money for emotional distress,defamation of charactor or other damages that they incured from your slander Which you would be responsible to pay them for.
Because it prevents the flow between cases.
Yes, an alibi is considered an affirmative defense in legal cases.