Legal Resource Center

Liability for Repeating Defamatory Statement

Can a person be held liable for simply repeating defamatory statements that someone else published? The answer is maybe. It depends on the circumstances surrounding the original publication and when and how it was repeated or republished. Determination of damages and from who they are sought is based on the point at Are you liable for repeating a defamatory statement? which the plaintiff suffered harm.

Who is Liable?

A person who is privileged to repeat a statement—for example, a person testifying in a court of law or a reporter relying on a public document or public official—is not liable for the any harm resulting from repeating a defamatory statement. Likewise, if the repetition is authorized by the originator of the defamatory statement, the person repeating the statement is not liable. In both of these situations the originator of the statement would be liable to the person who was defamed. Williams v. Fulks, 113 Ark. 82, 167 S.W. 93 (1914); Stonekink v. Briggs, 254 Cal.App.2d 563, 62 Cal.Rptr. 249 (1967).

If defamation is repeated without privilege and without permission, the person who repeated the statement and caused the harm is liable. Frommoethelydo v. Fire Ins. Exhange (1986) 42 Cal.3d 208, 217. “A false statement is not less libelous because it is the repetition of rumor or gossip or of statements or allegations that others have made concerning the matter.” Ray v. Citizen-News Co. (1936) 14 Cal.App.2d 6, 8-9. In fact, each repetition of a defamatory statement may be considered a separate publication and, therefore, a separate cause of action even if the source is identified. Di Giorgio Corp. v. Valley Labor Citizen (1968) 260 Cal.App.2d 268.

The person who originated the statement is not liable to the plaintiff if he or she did not intend for the material to be repeated and, based on the manner of distribution/publication, had no reason to believe it would be. Waite v. Stockgrowers’ Credit Corp. 63 N.D. 763, 249 N.W. 910 (1933).

However, if the originator distributed the material in such a way as to give the impression he was okay with the information being shared with many people, he too would be liable. Likewise if the material was published in such a way that reasonable people would expect it to be repeated, even if that was not the originator’s intention, he would be liable for damages.

Special Harm/Damages For Repetition of Defamatory Statements

This special application of this rule allows for action when the special harm resulting from the repetition is what makes the defamation actionable. In other words, if an originator publishes a slander, which is not actionable if special harm does not result from the publication, and repetition of that slander results in special harm, the plaintiff now has an action from the defamation. If the person who repeated the defamation has privilege, the originator is liable to the plaintiff, not the person who repeated it.

If the defamation is actionable per se, the plaintiff may seek both special and general damages relative to the harm caused by the defamatory statement.

This rule applies when harm is caused because of the negative impact of a rumor, as well as harm resulting from a single person’s specific reaction to a defamatory statement.


Repetition of defamatory statements and the liability resulting from it can be complicated. The experienced attorneys at Meyers Roman Friedberg & Lewis, LPA can help you determine how this rule applies to your situation. Call us at (216) 831-0042.

Revenge Porn: How to Fight Back [50 State Interactive Map]

Of all the posts I’ve written in my years of running this blog, few have gotten more traffic and response than an article I wrote three years ago on revenge porn. It focused on the malicious revenge porn site,, which posts intimate, personal and sometimes...
Read More

Defamation of Character – What is Online Defamation?

You sleep in one morning and wake up to find 30 messages on your phone. Rubbing the sleep from your eyes, you grope for an explanation. It is not your birthday, and there are no reports of terror attacks on your newsfeed. When you open the first message, though, you...
Read More

How to Remove Fake Google Reviews

Most business owners are aware of the importance online reviews play in expanding or maintaining one’s clients and business relationships. While positive reviews can spur potential clients to call, e-mail, or come to your place of business, a negative review can have...
Read More

‘Sugar Babies’ Not All So Sweet

Kent State University recently cracked the top 10 in national rankings. Kent didn’t win recognition for its prowess in basketball or academics. Rather, Kent has become nationally prominent for producing sugar babies. Sugar babies are women, usually college students or...
Read More

How to Report Slander on Twitter

Twitter is a popular social networking site that allows people to send, receive and read short 140-character messages that are commonly known as tweets.  Not only can users post tweets they can also share,  commonly known as retweet, other people’s posts. Twitter has...
Read More