MBE Rules · Torts
Defamation
The rule
Elements: (1) defamatory statement of fact, (2) of and concerning the plaintiff, (3) publication to a third party, (4) damages. Public figures must show actual malice (New York Times v. Sullivan) — knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard. Slander per se: business/professional, loathsome disease, sexual misconduct, crime of moral turpitude (presumed damages).
In plain English
Defamation is when someone says something false about you to others, harming your reputation. If you're a public figure, you must also prove they knew it was false or didn't care if it was true.
Worked example
A blogger falsely claims a local baker uses expired ingredients, and this is read by the baker's customers. The baker loses business and can sue for defamation, as the statement was false and harmed their reputation.
Memory hook
Defamation: Facts and Falsity Matter! Statement must harm reputation and be false, especially for public figures.
The trap
Students think: Any false statement is defamation. Wrong, because it must harm reputation and be published. The actual test is harm plus publication.
How examiners test it
The MBE loves: public figure sues for defamation. Question: actual malice? Trap: students miss need for knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard.
Drill this rule until it can't fail you.
Vrenberg generates unlimited questions on this exact rule, tracks your mastery of it, and brings it back until it sticks.