College Professor making slanderous statements

[Explorer 1994]

Jurisdiction

Pennsylvania

Hello, I am a college student getting ready to graduate from a small school in central Pennsylvania. A professor, on campus, has recently begun to spread lies about myself to other students and faculty. Some statements made even involve suggested physical violence towards myself. I found out about said statements due to students, who happen to be my friends. We by no means get along and have exchanged words, in a purely academic setting, in the past. I am meeting with an assistant dean on Monday to discuss what can be done within the power of my schools authority. My question is do I have any standing for defamation case against the professor? Thank you, any assistance will be greatly appreciated

 

[army judge]

Hello, I am a college student getting ready to graduate from a small school in central Pennsylvania. A professor, on campus, has recently begun to spread lies about myself to other students and faculty. Some statements made even involve suggested physical violence towards myself. I found out about said statements due to students, who happen to be my friends. We by no means get along and have exchanged words, in a purely academic setting, in the past. I am meeting with an assistant dean on Monday to discuss what can be done within the power of my schools authority. My question is do I have any standing for defamation case against the professor? Thank you, any assistance will be greatly appreciated

More than likely, you'd have to PROVE, not assert what was said, and if it was protected speech or simply gossip.

Take into consideration, two things.
If the professor is able to PROVE what he said was true, its not defamation.
Furthermore, the professor might be able to prove he made no damaging statements against your interests.
It's entirely possible others are playing one, or both of you for their amusement.
The other thing that could come into play is protected speech.

Finally, defamation lawsuits are expensive to prosecute.
Defamation lawsuits allow the defendant to probe into all aspects of your life.
In other words, far more damaging things could be revealed before God, the plaintiff, the jury, and the spectators than what has already allegedly been said.

 

[ElleMD]

Defamation requires that the person knows the information to be false and that you suffer some harm as a result. That is tough to prove and takes potentially years of litigation. Your best bet is to speak with your schools' Title XI coordinator.

 

[Michael Wechsler]

Defamation requires that the person knows the information to be false and that you suffer some harm as a result. That is tough to prove and takes potentially years of litigation. Your best bet is to speak with your schools' Title XI coordinator.

Actually I don't think that defamation requires intent, merely that the speaker makes a false statement orally (slander) or written (libel). With regard to public figures, for example the president of the United States, there is a higher standard that is required called "actual malice" whereby the party making the false statement had some type of intent. I think every lawyer remembers New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) from Torts classes where this famous case changed the entire fabric of defamation lawsuits. Will make a good standard definition to add to The Law Dictionary - Actual Malice.