I think I have a good case of Wisconsin defamation per se (accusing a
woman of sexual misconduct) but I'd like your opinion. My neighbor
filed for a permanent restraining order against me her unleashed
animal was killed in the street and I reported it to the police. They
have a long police record with shoplifting and bad check writing
convictions, among other things, which I submitted to the court to go
to their lack of truthfulness. The court denied their request for an
restraining order. During the trial the neighbor made unrelated and
false statements that my husband and I were having sex on our porch in
full view of the public. These were complete fabrications and I think
I can prove it with proper discovery. I was an Illinois
attorney many years ago and was thinking of getting my Wisconsin
license, but now believe this court action will come forward during
the admission process and may damage my chances, in addition to harming my 
general reputation in the community.  What do you think?

---

Clarification of Question by inkysue-ga on 30 Mar 2005 10:32 PST

Public lewd behavior is a crime in Wisconsin I think. Are the
neighbor's false statements saying we were having public sex a way of
saying I have committed a crime? Is this another bais for slander?
Thanks.

Dear inkysue-ga;

Thank you for allowing me to answer your interesting question. Keep in
mind that, as the terms state, we cannot provide legal advice or
direction in this forum. What we can do however is research what has
been published as a matter of public knowledge, and that is what I
have done for you here:

Generally speaking, libel is described as written defamation and
slander is oral defamation. If a one person accuses another of
criminal activity, it can be said that the person making the utterance
could be guilty of slander, but only when unprivileged conditions
exists. In other words, when one makes such a statement to authorities
(as a complaint) or in open court (as sworn testimony), these are
considered privileged communications and are not subject to criminal
or civil complaint.

Privileged communication means statements made during judicial
proceedings, (including conversations or written communications in
courts, or with investigators, or attorney?s) legislative proceedings,
and those made between spouses (in most states). These communications
are protected under the law and people may say whatever they wish in
these situations without fear of legal or civil repercussions.

An aggrieved party could not successfully make a viable claim of
slander or libel in a defamation suit due to privileged communications
statements alone.

There are a few other statements that are mostly immune to accusations
of defamation:

The truth: 
If a person is telling the truth when he makes a factual statement
about his character or actions, he isn?t likely to be sued. In reality
he is merely pointing out that the subject of the conversation defamed
?himself?.

Broad inclusion: 
If a person speaks so broadly of a group, no one member of that group
may complain. For example, if a person says ?All men are slobs?, one
man in particular cannot file suit for defamation.

Opinion: 
If a person is offering a statement of opinion, such a statement is
immune from defamation.

== Now?rhetorical questions: ==


?Can this harm your public reputation and affect your changes of state licensure?? 
>Perhaps. Especially if you are convicted of it.

?Do you have a case for libel or slander based on what has been said
about you in court??
>No. You do not.

?Could false statements about you in court, under oath, be considered perjury??
>Yes they very well could be considered perjury. And you may even be
able to sue civilly for damages related to perjury, but that of course
would be something only a Wisconsin attorney could evaluate with a
high degree of accuracy.

?If the complainant told other, non-judicial and non-law enforcement
persons a false story about your alleged sexual proclivities in an
effort to inflame passions or opinions against you unnecessarily and
undeservingly, would this be considered slander??
>Yes. Absolutely.

?Could you sue for damages under these conditions??
>Yes, very possibly so.
 
I hope you find that my research exceeds your expectations. If you
have any questions about my research please post a clarification
request prior to rating the answer. Otherwise I welcome your rating
and your final comments and I look forward to working with you again
in the near future. Thank you for bringing your question to us.

Best regards;
Tutuzdad-ga ? Google Answers Researcher



INFORMATION SOURCES

BARTLEBY
http://www.bartleby.com/61/6/P0570600.html

INTERNET LAW FOCUS
http://www.wave.net/immigration/lawyer/libel.html




SEARCH STRATEGY


SEARCH ENGINE USED:

Google ://www.google.com


SEARCH TERMS USED:

Wisconsin

Law

Statute

Slander

Libel

Civil

Lawsuit

Damages

Relief

Punitive

Reward

Award

---

Request for Answer Clarification by inkysue-ga on 05 Apr 2005 21:30 PDT

Thank you for the research. 

You did give me some guidance on the strength of my case, and I found
your analysis to be helpful overall.

Truthfully, the general information you noted is on-line in abundance.
That's why I tried to word my question with great specificity.

I didn't ask about perjury, but you did raise a tangential topic as
part of your answer. If you can, please clarify the conditions under
which one recovers damages for civil perjury.

Thanks again.

---

Clarification of Answer by tutuzdad-ga on 06 Apr 2005 06:34 PDT

Sorry for the delay. Apparently my collegue expertlaw-ga has responded
to your request on my behalf.

tutuzdad-ga

Thank you for a good job.

Sound like purjury to me.

You may find the case, Churchill v. WFA Econometrics Corp, 2002 WI App
305 (2002) to be of interest. That case explains Wisconsin's rule
relating to privilege provided to statements provided in the course of
judicial proceedings:

============================
The dispositive issue in this case is whether the statements Drefahl
made in her March 30, 2001 letter are protected by the absolute
privilege. Whether the absolute privilege applies is a question of law
that we review independently. Rady v. Lutz, 150 Wis. 2d 643, 647, 444
N.W.2d 58 (Ct. App. 1989). We conclude that the absolute privilege
applies to the statements made by Drefahl.

Judicial proceedings are protected by an absolute privilege. Id. at
647-48. The absolute privilege rule was established to provide
litigants with the freedom to access the courts, "to preserve and
defend their rights and to protect attorneys during the course of
their representation of clients." Id. at 648. The rule is not limited
to protecting attorneys, but also extends to witnesses and experts who
are involved in the judicial proceedings. See Bromund v. Holt, 24 Wis.
2d 336, 341-42, 129 N.W.2d 149 (1964).

In order for the privilege to apply, the statements must satisfy two
requirements: (1) the statement "must be made in a procedural context
that is recognized as affording absolute privilege"; and (2) the
statement "must be relevant to the matter under consideration." Rady,
150 Wis. 2d at 648. Thus, we must determine whether the statements
made by Drefahl satisfy these two requirements.
============================

It is beyond question that statements provided in court meet the first
requirement. The second requirement, that the statement be relevant to
the matter under consideration, depends upon the facts and
circumstances of the proceeding at issue. As the Churchill case
indicates, "In determining relevance in this context, however, it is
important to note that the statements should be liberally construed,
and any doubt as to relevance should be resolved in favor of finding
the statement privileged." It may be a tough burden to meet, but it is
worth discussing your situation with a Wisconsin lawyer who handles
defamation cases to see if you can make a case despite the fact that
the statements at issue were made in court.

You can review the case on the State Bar of Wisconsin website:
http://www.wisbar.org/res/capp/2002/02-0348.htm

As a general rule, absent a statute permitting such an action, a
private individual cannot bring a civil action seeking damages for
"perjury".

Excellent response. Thank you very much.