Interrogatories Presented During Discovery Session For A Case of Defamation

Unlike a majority of the personal injury cases, a case of defamation arises from commission of an intentional act. Yet, like any lawsuit, one filed by the victim of defamation leads to a discovery session. During that session, the disputing parties pose interrogatories.

What is defamation?

A victim of defamation has had an untrue statement about him or her shared publicly. The public airing of that untrue statement has harmed the victim’s reputation.

There are 2 types of defamation. One is libel, in which harmful words get written or published. The other one is slander, which has become the term used for oral defamation. Anyone that wants to file a charge of defamation against a particular person should plan to file that charge in a civil court.

What must the plaintiff prove, in order to win a defamation case?

The plaintiff must prove that the hurtful statements made or written by the defendant were false. In addition, the plaintiff that has shown the defendant’s statements to be false must then prove that those same hurtful statements caused him or her to suffer real harm.

Plaintiffs are not guaranteed the ability to win a case, if they prove both of those elements. Still, the plaintiff’s chances for winning vanish completely, if he or she has failed to prove the existence of either element.

What sort of interrogatories might be posed during the discovery session for a defamation case?

The defendant might be asked these questions, each of which gets presented in written form. What information have you shared with others, regarding this lawsuit?

Please list any blogs, forums or websites where you chose to comment about the plaintiff.

Can you name the people that you were speaking with, whenever you were talking about the plaintiff, during the past year?

The answers to the above questions should help the Personal Injury Lawyer in Waterloo for the plaintiff to determine how much of what the defendant said or wrote was untrue. The defendant could not be charged for sharing facts, even if it did damage the plaintiff’s reputation. The plaintiff might be asked these questions, also in written form:

In what ways has the defendant damaged your reputation? Have you claimed any other type of damage?

What specific comment or statement was made or written by the defendant, and thus managed to harm your reputation?

Can you explain how each of those same comments or statements was untrue?

The search for specific information provides the jury with a sense for the full extent of the damage, as claimed by the plaintiff. If that damage were quite limited, then the plaintiff’s award might be rather small. On the other hand, someone that was grievously harmed could get a large award.