Question 11 pts

A software designer and software programmer ran into each other at a crowded software convention. The designer suggested to the programmer that they become partners. The programmer quickly retorted, "Look buddy, I like you, you're a nice guy and all that, but I'd never become your business partner because when it comes to software design, you are totally incompetent." This remark was overheard by the private secretary to the CEO of a major software company that often subcontracted portions of jobs to smaller software design businesses, although it had never used this designer before.

If the designer sues the programmer for defamation, who is likely to prevail?

Group of answer choices

The programmer, because there was no publication.

The designer, unless the programmer did not know her statement could have been overheard.

The programmer, if her statement about the designer's competence is true.

The designer, if he suffered pecuniary loss as a result of the programmer's statement.

Question 2Question 21 pts

A proprietor of a business in a small town who had a very antagonistic relationship with the mayor was denied a renewal of his business license. At a village council meeting that was closed to the public, the proprietor engaged in a heated argument with the mayor and demanded to know why his business license had not been renewed. The mayor truthfully declared that it was due to reports that the business was conducting illegal gambling on the premises. The mayor had received such reports but had not yet had them investigated. Council members at the meeting later voted to overturn the mayor's decision and renew the license. After a subsequent investigation, the reports were determined to be false.

In a defamation action by the proprietor against the mayor, will the proprietor prevail?

Group of answer choices

No, because the mayor's statement was oral and the proprietor did not suffer special damages from the statement.

No, because the proprietor had demanded an explanation for why his license was denied.

Yes, because the mayor had demonstrated malice toward the proprietor.

Yes, because the mayor had neglected to investigate the reports before making the statement.

Question 3Question 31 pts

In the middle of a trial for breach of contract, the defendant businessman is called as a witness. During the course of the trial, the Defense lawyer asks the businessman if he had ever done business with the Plaintiff. In response to the question, the businessman responded with a rant about how his housekeeper had been stealing from him for many years and tried to kill his dog at least three times. Assume also that the statement about the housekeeper is untrue and that the housekeeper's performance is legally irrelevant to the trial.

Which of the following is the best argument for why the judicial privilege should not apply to the statement in a subsequent defamation lawsuit by the housekeeper against the businessman?

Group of answer choices

The statements by the business person/defendant are slanderous per se.

The statement about the house keeper is legally irrelevant to the trial.

The statement about the housekeeper is unrelated to the trial.

The housekeeper was not involved in the trial.

Question 4Question 41 pts

During a debate on gun rights on the floor of the federal House of Representatives, Representative 1 who is in favor of reducing access to guns, knowingly makes a false statement about Representative 2, who is a gun rights advocate. Representative 1 said, "Why don't you tell us the real reason you support gun rights. Let everyone know that you are a majority shareholder in the largest gun manufacturing corporation in the country." The truth is that Representative 2 has no shares in the gun manufacturing corporation and has no other agenda other than applying faithfully what she thinks are the mandates of the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Which of the following is the reason Representative 1 may not be sued successfully for defamation by Representative 2?

Group of answer choices

Statements made during debates on Constitutional rights need to be wide and free ranging and defamation law suits are therefore barred.

Public officials are prohibited from instituting defamation suits.

Representative 1's statement was made as part of a legislative body's proceeding.

Representative 1's statement was made as part of a legislative body's proceedings and the statement was related to the legislative proceedings underway at the time it was made.

Question 5Question 51 pts

A prominent radio talk show host respected for her in-depth reporting of national news issues, stated on her show, during the recently concluded election for state governor which Candidate 1 won, "I have 2 things to say about Candidate 1. The first is that I think he is not an honorable person because he stated he would not use private financing and then did. The second is that I think he is a terrorist." Candidate 1 sues the talk show host for defamation.

Which of the following is true?

Group of answer choices

Neither the first statement nor the second statement, on its face, is absolutely protected as opinion.

Both statements are absolutely protected because Candidate 1 is a public official.

Only the first statement, on its face, is absolutely protected as a value judgment opinion.

Candidate 1 need not prove falsity if he seeks to recover in defamation.

Question 6Question 61 pts

Barack, a private citizen who owned an appliance repair shop, was at a cocktail party when he saw Sarah, one of his competitors. Approaching Sarah, Barack said, "I'm glad to run into you. I was hoping that we could discuss the possibility of going into a partnership instead of competing with each other." Sarah responded, "I wouldn't go into business with you because ripped off the last three people you were in business with." Sarah did not know that her statement was false at the time it was made. Hilary, a customer of Barack's overheard the conversation. As a result, the following day, Hilary canceled a contract she had with Barack.

If Barack asserts a claim against Sarah for defamation, Barack will be successful if:

Group of answer choices

Sarah should have known the statement was false when she made it.

Sarah should have known that the statement would be overheard when she made it.

Sarah should have known the statement was defamatory when she made it.

Sarah should have known that harm would have resulted from the statement.

Question 7Question 71 pts

The Daily News, a local newspaper, wrote an editorial. It seems that the author of the editorial had been doing some checking and found out that there were several ethical violations against several lawyers in the state. In a state of 5000 lawyers, 100 lawyers had been found guilty of ethical violations during a 10-year period. The violations ranged from not completing the required number of CLE credits to actually stealing a client's money. The editorial said, "The situation in this state is serious. All of the lawyers in this state are crooks. They are all engaging in ethical violations. The problem is, not all of them have been caught." Susan Doe, a lawyer in that state, sued the newspaper for defamation. Ms. Doe had never been found guilty of an ethical violation.

The best answer concerning this action is:

Group of answer choices

She will lose since it is impossible to prove she has not committed some type of ethical violation over the whole course of her career.

She will lose since the defamation concerns all members of a large class, even though she is a member of that class.

She will win since the statement is defamatory and false. Not all of the lawyers had committed ethical violations.

She will win since she is a member of the class that was defamed.

Question 8Question 81 pts

Jane Jones is a very good trial attorney. She is representing a man who is accused of murder. The local newspaper ran an article that said, "Attorney Jane Jones is a dishonest crook. She knows that her client committed murder and yet she is trying to get him acquitted. Jane Jones is actually a member of organized crime and is representing this murderer as part of her job for the crime family." The story was false. Jane Jones is an honest, hardworking lawyer. She handles criminal cases on a regular basis. She is not part of organized crime. If Ms. Jones decides to sue the newspaper, she will have to face the issue of whether she is a public or private figure.

Which of the following is the best answer?

Group of answer choices

She is a public figure since, as a lawyer, she is an "officer of the court."

She is a public figure since she handles criminal cases.

She is a private figure.

She is a public figure since the murder trial was important enough for the newspaper to write Question 9

John Jones was running for governor of his state. For a two-day period, just before the election, Mr. Jones seemed to have disappeared. No one knew where he was. The local newspaper wrote the following article. "We have just been informed that Mr. John Jones, candidate for governor, spent two days having a romantic weekend with his girlfriend. We understand that Mr. Jones' wife is extremely upset, but is denying that her husband has a girlfriend." Although John Jones had been leading in the polls, his numbers fell dramatically. The election came so suddenly after the story appeared in the newspaper, Mr. Jones did not really have time to refute it. It turns out that the story was false. Mr. Jones was, in fact, checking on his elderly mother who lived in a different state. His mother had several health problems and needed some attention.

If Mr. Jones brings an action against the newspaper, it will be one in:

Group of answer choices

Libel since it was written.

Slander since it was written.

Slander per se since it alleges a lack of chastity.

Slander per se since it affects his trade or business.

Question 10

John Jones was running for governor of his state. For a two-day period, just before the election, Mr. Jones seemed to have disappeared. No one knew where he was. The local newspaper wrote the following article. "We have just been informed that Mr. John Jones, candidate for governor, spent two days having a romantic weekend with his girlfriend. We understand that Mr. Jones' wife is extremely upset, but is denying that her husband has a girlfriend." Although John Jones had been leading in the polls, his numbers fell dramatically. The election came so suddenly after the story appeared in the newspaper, Mr. Jones did not really have time to refute it. It turns out that the story was false. Mr. Jones was, in fact, checking on his elderly mother who lived in a different state. His mother had several health problems and needed some attention.

If Mr. Jones is able to prove that, in addition to the facts appearing above, the newspaper had also endorsed the opposing candidate for governor, what impact will that have on the case?

Group of answer choices

It will show that the newspaper failed to use reasonable care to determine the truth of the story which is necessary for a public figure to win an action for defamation.

It will prove "actual malice" since it is evidence that the newspaper wanted to opposing candidate to win.

The evidence will have very little impact on the case.

It will show common law malice which is necessary for a public figure to win a defamation action.