Legal Definitions - words actionable in themselves

Words actionable in themselves refers to statements that are so inherently damaging to a person's reputation that the law presumes harm has occurred, even without specific proof of financial loss or other injury. These types of statements are considered defamatory "per se," meaning "by themselves" or "on their face." If such words are proven false and published, the person targeted by them does not need to demonstrate actual monetary damages to bring a successful defamation lawsuit; the harm to their reputation is simply assumed.

• Example 1: False Accusation of a Serious Crime

  A local newspaper falsely publishes an article claiming that a respected school principal was recently arrested and charged with felony theft, when in reality, the principal has a spotless record and was never involved in such an incident.

  This is an example of "words actionable in themselves" because falsely accusing someone of a serious crime like felony theft is presumed by law to cause immediate and significant damage to their reputation. The principal would not need to prove that they lost their job, suffered financial hardship, or were shunned by the community to bring a defamation claim; the inherent harm from such an accusation is assumed.

• Example 2: False Statement About a Loathsome Disease

  During a public meeting, a disgruntled former employee falsely announces that their previous boss, a well-known community figure, has a highly contagious and socially stigmatized disease.

  This statement would be considered "actionable in themselves." Historically, and in many modern interpretations, falsely attributing a "loathsome disease" (a serious, socially stigmatized, and often contagious illness) to someone is presumed to cause severe damage to their social standing and reputation. The boss would not need to show specific evidence of social isolation or financial loss to pursue a defamation claim.

• Example 3: False Statement Damaging to One's Profession or Business

  A rival business owner spreads false rumors online that a competitor, a licensed architect, consistently uses substandard materials and has had multiple building projects collapse due to negligence.

  These are "words actionable in themselves" because they directly attack the architect's professional competence and integrity in their trade. The law presumes that such false accusations about professional misconduct or incompetence will inherently harm the architect's reputation and ability to secure clients. The architect would not need to demonstrate specific lost contracts or income to bring a defamation lawsuit.