Small claims or civil suit?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pake

New Member
I am from Belize which is a relatively small country with a population of about 300k. Therefore, everyone knows everyone. I am pretty well known in Belize and also in the Belizean community in Los Angeles which is the largest outside of the actual country. I moderate a Belizean message board and a rogue member who was banned went on another Belizean message board which is popular for users posting nude pictures of Belizean women they've slept with. He then created a fake profile as a woman and posted pictures of me obtained from an old Myspace account and said that I had infected them with the HIV virus and I was going around spreading it throughout the Belizean community.

A woman who runs a popular Belizean website featuring the latest events in the Belizean community decided to copy that page and send the email to her mailing list which is pretty extensive. People began calling me asking if I had seen the email. A few people forwarded it to me and I can see who was the original sender as she had her signature attached to the email including her website and phone number. I called her and she was unapologetic saying if it was online it was public domain and she can send it to whoever she wants to. I informed her that it was libelous for her to do so because she is now taking responsibility for distributing the false information.

As a result of that email being forwarded around, I've received threats from family members of women I've been intimately involved with and my dating life has suffered. I went and took an HIV test and the results were positive. I now want to sue her for libel on the grounds of defamation per se. I have all the emails that were forwarded to me (with her signature attached) from people who it was sent to and I have a copy of my HIV test results as evidence. I also have someone who I was intimate with who also received the email and she is willing to testify on my behalf the stressed it caused her and myself.

My question is: should I file a small claims suit or a civil suit. I found that I can sue for up to $7,500 in small claims court and I feel pretty confident I would be awarded the full amount. It would also be much easier. If I file a civil suit, most lawyers won't take this case. I figured I could represent myself and hire a paralegal to prepare the documents and such for me. I figure it's a pretty open and shut case seeing I have the proof that she did in fact distribute this email and that it is absolutely false. However, I am concerned that if I sue for $10k and an apology email to be sent out to the mailing list, the judge might not rule for the full amount and I might get less than if I went through small claims. The woman has a link to her Myspace page on her website and in all her pics she's pretty extravagant. She definitely leads people to believe she is doing quite well for herself. Any advice would be appreciated
 
You need to consider not only what your damages might amount to, but how you plan to prove that. If you figure you're over the small claims limit, either drop your claim to the limit, or figure out whether it will be worth it to pursue the full amount. Whether you'll get more in small claims or civil court is anybody's guess.

I went and took an HIV test and the results were positive. I now want to sue her for libel on the grounds of defamation per se.

I think you mean the results were negative. It's not good to be HIV-positive.
 
You need to consider not only what your damages might amount to, but how you plan to prove that. If you figure you're over the small claims limit, either drop your claim to the limit, or figure out whether it will be worth it to pursue the full amount. Whether you'll get more in small claims or civil court is anybody's guess.

But in this case where it's defamation per se, aren't the damages implied? I thought I didn't need to prove any damages but rather that I have been falsely accused of having a loathesome disease.
 
In defamation per se (such as an allegation that you suffer from a sexually transmitted disease), damage is implied. That means the court will presume you were damaged. It will not presume that you were damaged to the tune of $X.

You would probably do well not to describe being HIV+ as "having a loathsome disease". Although being accused of maliciously spreading it is certainly loathsome.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top