At page 984 [T]he language complained of must be set forth in words or words to that effect . . . . [T]he defendant should not be required to resort to the ofttimes expensive discovery process to drag from a litigant what he really intends to do to his adversary.8 citing cases
- Eagle Air Med v. Sentinel Air Med. All., No. 2:16-cv-00176, 2019 WL 6879252 (D. Utah Dec. 17, 2019).([T]he language complained of must be set forth in words or words to that effect . . . . [T]he defendant should not be required to resort to the ofttimes expensive discovery process to drag from a litigant what he reall…)
- Total Quality Sys. v. Universal Synaptics, No. 1:22-cv-00167 (D. Utah May 23, 2024).Utah 1998) (“[F]ederal pleading standards generally require the complaint to state the specific words of the allegedly defamatory statement in order to allow the defendant to frame a responsive pleading.”). 149 Rowe, 2015 WL 1307675 , at *…
- Nuhaily v. Kilgore Companies, No. 2:20-cv-00262 (D. Utah June 29, 2020).In Dennett, the plaintiff claimed defamation and simply alleged “defendant made, declared, and published to certain persons certain derogatory and libelous statements relating and pertaining to the plaintiff which tended to degrade and dis…
- Nelson v. Target Corp., 2014 UT App 205, 334 P.3d 1010.publishedAnd in defamation cases, "the language complained of must be set forth" with "a certain degree of specificity." Dennelt v. Smith, 21 Utah 2d 368 , 445 P.2d 983, 984 (1968).
- Zoumadakis v. Uintah Basin Med. Ctr., Inc., 2005 UT App 325, 122 P.3d 891.published As a result, “these principles are applied with great liberality in sustaining the sufficiency of allegations stating a cause of action or an affirmative defense.” Id. ¶ 3 In the context of defamation, “[a]n allegation of ‘certain derogato…
- Boisjoly v. Morton Thiokol, Inc., 706 F. Supp. 795 (D. Utah 1988).publishedWilliams v. State Farm Insurance Co., 656 P.2d 966, 971 (1982); Dennett v. Smith, 21 Utah 2d 368 , 445 P.2d 983, 984 (1968).
- Williams v. State Farm Ins. Co., 656 P.2d 966 (Utah 1982).publishedAn allegation of “certain derogatory and libelous statements” is insufficient; a complaint for defamation must set forth “the language complained of ... in words or words to that effect .... ” Dennett v. Smith, 21 Utah 2d 368, 369 , 445 P.…
- Martinez v. Winner, 548 F. Supp. 278 (D. Colo. 1982).publishedDennett v. Smith, 21 Utah 2d 368 , 445 P.2d 983, 984 (1968) (emphasis in original).
v.
Alvin I. SMITH, Defendant and Respondent
Appeal from a dismissal for reason that the complaint did not state a cause of action in a slander suit. Affirmed. No costs awarded.
The complaint simply averred that “defendant made, declared and published to certain persons certain derogatory and libelous statements relating and pertaining to the plaintiff which tended to degrade and discredit him.”
We believe and hold that such allegation does not accord with the letter and spirit of Rule 8, Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, common law rules of pleading, or the most liberal of any other rules of pleading.
It is almost axiomatic that in defamation cases a certain degree of specificity is an essential in pleadings, that the language complained of must be set forth in words or words to that effect and that the defendant should not be required to resort to the ofttimes expensive discovery process to drag from a litigant what he really intends to do to his adversary by a vehicle shrouded in mystery.
Appellant says that Kirby v. Martin-dale, [1] a leading case on defamation, has not been cited since 1936, and hence should be discounted or discarded. That case states the law in a libel case but since defendant says it is not the law, we now cite it with approval, and now it has a date circa 1968 for approbation, — at least by this court.
CROCKETT, C. J., and CALLISTER, TUCKETT,' and ELLETT, JJ., concur.. 19 S.D. 394, 103 N.W. 648 (1905).