Donald Trump Loses Libel Suit -- Proof of Malice Was Missing

Bloomberg News reported today that Donald Trump's libel suit against New York Times editor Timothy O'Brien was dismissed by New Jersey state Superior Court Judge Michele M. Fox. She agreed with the reporter's lawyers "that the case should be dismissed, in part, because Trump failed to show he suffered monetary loss or defamation.

"Trump hasn’t shown 'clear and convincing evidence to establish malice' by O’Brien, Fox said in an opinion today."

For those of you studying for the APR exam, here's a quick review of defamation law and the common law defenses employed by the media. Remember, libel = published works, slander = spoken or broadcast words.

Legally, at least four conditions of defamation must be met to constitute a crime. The disputed words must:

1) Hurt the reputation of the victim
2) Identify the victim by name
3) Be communicated to an audience
4) Contain an element of fault
5) In absence of fault, the victim must offer proof of damages/injury.

The common law defenses again defamation include:

1) Truth - This is the oldest and strongest defense. The plaintiff must prove falsity and that the statement was made with malicious intent or by negligence.
2) Privilege - Fair and accurate accounts of what occurred in government proceedings or documents are also defensible.
3) Fair Comment - It is legal for journalists to offer their opinions about the performance of those in the public limelight like actors, politicians, athletes, musicians, authors, and other celebrities.

The lesson for Mr. Trump in this case is that defamation is extremely hard to prove, in the legal system and in the court of public opinion.