 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hatch v. Fred Meyer Inc.3/1/1999
resume that the only element at issue here is damages. Hatch claims that she need not prove damages because she alleges a defamation per se, "imputation of unchastity to a woman." But, contrary to Hatch's assertion, more than damages is at issue here. At summary Judgement and again on appeal, the defendants challenge whether, as a matter of law, the e-mail constitutes defamation.
The e-mail was not defamatory. It did not make false statements about Hatch's propensity for sexual exploits. Instead, as a prank, it pretended to be a message from Hatch. There is no dispute that the two readers of the e-mail understood its nature as a prank of pretense. No reader of the e-mail understood it as making any statement (much less a false one) about Hatch. Because of this understanding, the e-mail message had no capacity to defame Hatch. Summary dismissal of the defamation claim was proper.
We affirm the CR 12(b)(6) order of dismissal and the orders granting summary Judgement.
WE CONCUR:
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Washington Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|