March 28, 2024

Florida Law

Libel's First Cousin

False light suits don't question the facts of a media report, just the implications of the facts.

Art Levy | 7/1/2007


Attorney Dennis Larry, who is representing the Pensacola News Journal, sees no difference between libel cases and false light cases

First recognized as part of privacy law less than 100 years ago, the legal concept of “false light” establishes that a media report can harm someone if the report casts the person in a “false light” — even if every fact in the article is true.

Some lawyers buy the concept and some don’t. But with libel cases tough to pursue, false light is frequently the legal action of choice for people unhappy with how they’re portrayed in the media.

Stuart attorney Willie Gary has pursued several high-profile false light cases. Representing Joe Anderson Jr., a west Florida highway contractor, Gary won an $18.2-million false light verdict against the Pensacola News Journal and its parent company, Gannett Co., in 2003. The suit alleged that the newspaper put Anderson in a “false light” in an article that mentioned that he shot and killed his wife but waited two paragraphs before reporting that law enforcement officials determined the shooting was an accident. An appeals court overturned the verdict last year, and the Florida Supreme Court is expected to hear an appeal in October.

Gary has filed another false light case, set for trial in September, concerning articles the Gainesville Sun wrote about Alachua County developer Clark Butler. As in the Anderson suit, the accusations don’t include false statements but rather what Gary says are implications that are false and have hurt Butler’s reputation. “Just the compensatory damages in that case could be a quarter of a billion dollars,” Gary says. “That’s the actual loss. Obviously, the punitive damages could break the whole case in excess of a billion dollars.”

Attorneys on the other side say many false light cases are simply attempts to end-run libel law. “Well, it confounds a lot of scholars, so it’s not exactly easy,” says Dennis Larry, an attorney for the Pensacola News Journal and Gannett Co. in the Anderson case. “But the differences 99% of the time don’t exist.”

One difference that litigants try to take advantage of is the statute of limitations. For libel cases, it’s two years. For false light cases, it’s four. When the 1st District Court of Appeal reversed the $18.2-million verdict in the Anderson case, it found that the case didn’t differ from a libel case and therefore should have been subject to the two-year statute of limitations.

Another difference deals with malice — the issue of whether a reporter made an honest mistake or intentionally reported falsehoods. “There has always been a question about whether you had to prove actual malice in false light cases,” says Thomas Julin, a media attorney and partner at Hunton & Williams in Miami. “You do in libel, but it’s unclear in false light.”

Rachel Fugate, a media attorney with Thomas & LoCicero in Tampa, says much of the confusion over false light stems from a 2001 case in Florida involving CBS’ “60 Minutes.” That case, which supported the four-year statute of limitations standard, also challenged the notion that the media could not be held liable when they accurately reported information from public records. The “60 Minutes” case “really kind of opened up this black hole of a procedure for these cases where you really don’t know what it is and it’s pretty hard to defend against,” says Fugate, who is helping to prepare the Sun’s defense against Butler. She’s hopeful that after hearing the Anderson case, the Florida Supreme Court “will give us some guidance one way or another.”

In the past legislative session, state Sen. Don Gaetz of Fort Walton Beach and state Rep. Dave Murzin of Pensacola filed bills that would have eliminated false light as a tort in Florida. Neither bill passed.

“It’s a very controversial area,” Julian says. “It has, I think, a lot of publishers and broadcasters quite nervous whenever they see these false light claims. Because if it becomes a really entrenched, recognized tort, it really poses a serious hazard to the reporting of truthful statements that people don’t like — and that’s 90% of the news.”

Tags: Politics & Law, North Central, Government/Politics & Law

Florida Business News

Florida News Releases

Florida Trend Video Pick

Structural technology keeps Skyway Bridge safe from mass destruction
Structural technology keeps Skyway Bridge safe from mass destruction

USF marine scientist Mark Luther, says dozens of concrete barriers protecting the bridge from collision is just the beginning of an ongoing effort to keep it safe.

 

Video Picks | Viewpoints@FloridaTrend

Ballot Box

Should Congress ban the popular social media app TikTok in the U.S.?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Need more details
  • What is TikTok?
  • Other (Comment below)

See Results

Florida Trend Media Company
490 1st Ave S
St Petersburg, FL 33701
727.821.5800

© Copyright 2024 Trend Magazines Inc. All rights reserved.