Sack on Defamation: Libel, Slander, and Related Problems offers strategic guidance for plaintiffs and defense attorneys and fully covers the basic elements of a defamation claim, including the types and amounts of damages that can be awarded, the treatment of libel per se and slander per se, the invasion of privacy torts, the causes of action for injurious falsehood, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent misstatement, and the issues of jurisdiction and motion practice. Written by a U.S. Court of Appeals judge and updated by a constitutional law scholar from the University of Florida Levin College of Law, this treatise pinpoints practical legal issues vital to your clients, helping you understand when “truth” is not a defense.

The latest release includes updates on:

• Chapter 2 on how to determine whether certain communications are defamatory covers a case involving political talk radio in which a politician was described as having “started a new political party” and a case from Texas involving an abortion opponent’s depiction of abortion advocacy groups as “criminal organizations.”
• Chapter 4 discusses a case in which the New Hampshire Supreme Court interpreted New Hampshire law to protect a defendant who had couched his defamatory statement as speculation, thus providing more protection for opinion than Milkovich.
• Chapter 5 covers a case in which the South Carolina Supreme Court held that a high school football coach, who was a public employee, was neither a public figure nor a public official and a New York case finding that a DJ was a limited-purpose public figure because he had purposefully and continuously publicized and promoted his business relationships with famous artists to attract publicity and business for himself and his record label.
• Chapter 7  examines how hyperlinking, reposting, and retweeting is expanded with the discussion of cases from state and federal courts in New York, New Hampshire, Florida, California, and Ohio.
• Chapter 10 discusses judicial review of damages awards takes note that plaintiffs may opt to prove “actual malice” to recover presumed damages without the need to prove actual damages.

The Table of Cases and the Defendant-Plaintiff Table have also been updated.

Order a print copy today.

PLI PLUS subscribers can access this title through their subscription.