#efta01093269
LightNews LightNews
epsteinweb.bsky.social
Parts 1-2/2 — EFTA01093269.jpg
#epsteinweb #efta01093269
https://epsteinweb.org
Available in the iOS app store now!
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/epstein-web/id6758880661
EFTA01093254 | EFTA01093269 Case 3:14-cv-30211-MGM Document 89 Filed 10/09/15 Page 16 of 38 elements of defamation: (1) a publication; (2) that is false; (3) defamatory, meaning damaging to the good reputation of the person who is the subject of the statement; (4) made by an actor with the requisite degree of fault; (5) is not protected by any privilege; and (6) causes injury to the subject.12 See, e.g., Jews ForJesus, Inc. P. Rapp, 997 So. 2d 1098, 1106 (Fla. 2008); Taus v. Lorna, 151 P.3d 1185, 1209 (Cal. 2007), abrogated on other grounds b, Oasis West Rea/p, LLC P. Goldman, 250 P.3d 1115 (Cal. 2011); Blau), v. N.Y. Times Co., 728 P.2d 1177, 1182-83, 1186 (Cal. 1986). Defendant moves to dismiss Plaintiffs' claims, alleging inadequacies related to several of these elements. These challenges can generally be organized as follows. First, Defendant asserts that none of the allegedly defamatory statements contain false factual assertions that are also defamatory. As pan of this argument, Defendant specifically asserts the claim based upon the November 20, 2014 Statement regarding Plaintiff Traitz fails because the statement was substantially true and the claims based upon the November 21, 2014 Statement fail because that statement was not sufficiently "of and concerning" Plaintiffs Traitz or Serignese. Second, Defendant argues he cannot be liable for defamation because Plaintiffs have failed to plead that either Defendant or his agents acted with the constitutionally required degree of fault. Third, Defendant argues the November 20, 2014 Statement did not cause Plaintiff Traitz to suffer incremental harm. Fourth, Defendant asserts the allegedly defamatory statements are protected by a "self-defense privilege." The court addresses these arguments in turn. 1. The Statements: Factual True Defamatory Of and Concerning In order for a defamation claim to survive a motion to dismiss, the allegedly defamatory statement must contain at least one false factual assertion which is also defamatory. See, e.g., Jews ForJesus, Inc, 997 So. 2d at 1106; Taw, 151 P.3d at 1209. Depending on the nature of the statement and the context in which it was made, courts will place different emphasis on these two components. In this case, Defendant argues three of the four statements at issue do not contain factual assertions that are false, or even capable of being 12 Relevant differences which may exist between California and Florida law regarding defamation are addressed as applicable throughout this Discussion. 16 EFTA01093269
May 9, 2026 at 5:45 AM