innocent construction rule in Illinois

2021Second, Allstate contends the statements are capable of an innocent construction because the allegedly defamatory statements, made months after plaintiffs were fired from Allstate, could reasonably be understood to be about other former employees in the Equity -9- Division and the statements can be reasonably construed in a way that does not assert illegal or unethical behavior by former employees. ¶ 32 Both of Allstate’s arguments are rooted in the innocent construction rule, which our supreme court clarified in Chapski v. Copley Press, 92 Ill. 2d 344 (1982).

2014In applying the innocent construction rule, we must consider the alleged defamatory words " 'in context, with the words and the implications therefrom given their natural and obvious meaning.' " Id. at 503 (quoting Chapski v. Copley Press, 92 Ill. 2d 344, 352 (1982)). ¶ 43 Plaintiff's complaint alleged that defendant's articles constituted defamation per se because they implied that she either violated state law in order to obtain a homeowner's exemption or committed perjury in her board of election filings.

2021“Thus, the innocent construction rule requires a writing ‘to be read as a whole.’ ” Id. (quoting John v. Tribune Co., 24 Ill. 2d 437, 442 (1962)).

2015Tuite, 224 Ill. 2d at 512 (the innocent construction rule requires that a writing be read “ ‘as a whole’ ” (quoting John v. Tribune Co., 24 Ill. 2d 437, 442 (1962)).

2024For example, the supreme court refused a request to abandon the innocent construction rule in defamation per se cases, alluding to the advancement of “free speech and free press and *** the robust discussion of daily affairs.” Tuite, 224 Ill. 2d at 511 .

2021Tuite, 224 Ill. 2d at 510, 512 . ¶ 19 Instead, when “construing the statement under the innocent construction rule, [we] must ‘give the allegedly defamatory words their natural and obvious meaning’ and interpret them ‘as they appeared to have been used and according to the idea they were intended to convey to the reasonable reader.’ ” Id. at 510 (quoting Bryson, 174 Ill. 2d at 93 ). “[T]he context of [the] statement is critical in determining its meaning.” Id. at 512.

1990In Valentine v. North American Co. (1974), 60 Ill. 2d 168, 171 , this court stated that the innocent construction rule had been “consistently applied by the appellate courts in this State.” Three justices dissented in Valentine, disagreeing with the majority’s conclusion that the statement at issue was subject to an innocent construction.

1986(Valentine v. North American Co. (1974), 60 Ill. 2d 168, 172 (Ward, J., Underwood, C.J., and Schaefer, J., dissenting).) In John it was said: “We further believe the language in defendant’s articles is not libelous of plaintiff when the innocent construction rule is consulted.

2026App. 3d 443, 452 (2000). ¶ 23 Another defense is the innocent construction rule, under which “even if an alleged statement falls into one of the categories of words that are defamatory per se, it will not be actionable per se if it is reasonably capable of an innocent construction.” Green v. Rogers, 234 Ill. 2d 478, 499 (2009).

2025Because damages are presumed, “a defamation per se claim must be pled with a heightened level of precision and particularity.” Green, 234 Ill. 2d at 495 . ¶ 40 Additionally, under the innocent construction rule, a statement that falls into a category of words that are defamatory per se is not actionable if it is reasonably capable of an innocent -14- Nos. 1-23-1077 and 1-23-2376, cons. construction.

2025There are five categories of statements considered to be defamatory per se, including, as relevant here, words that impute that a person: “is unable to perform or lacks integrity in performing her or his employment duties”; “lacks ability or otherwise prejudices that person in her or his profession”; and “has committed a crime.” Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558, 579-80 (2006). ¶ 128 Under the innocent construction rule, even if a statement fits into one of the defamatory per se categories, it will not be actionable “if it is reasonably capable of an innocent

2023Kolegas, 154 Ill. 2d at 11 ; see also Anderson v. Vanden Dorpel, 172 Ill. 2d 399, 413 (1996). ¶ 19 Plaintiffs allege the innocent construction rule does not defeat their claim because the quoted language in Steinberg’s article encompasses a sufficiently small group of Polish emigrants in the Chicago area who grew up in Poland during World War II.

2008Tuite v. Corbitt, 358 Ill.

2008Tuite v. Corbitt, 358 Ill.

2021Tuite, 224 Ill. 2d at 510, 512 . ¶ 19 Instead, when “construing the statement under the innocent construction rule, [we] must ‘give the allegedly defamatory words their natural and obvious meaning’ and interpret them ‘as they appeared to have been used and according to the idea they were intended to convey to the reasonable reader.’ ” Id. at 510 (quoting Bryson, 174 Ill. 2d at 93 ). “[T]he context of [the] statement is critical in determining its meaning.” Id. at 512.

2015“Whether a statement is reasonably susceptible to an innocent interpretation is a question of law for the court to decide.” Bryson v. News America Publications, Inc., 174 Ill. 2d 77, 90 (1996).8 8 We note that in Bryson, our supreme court ruled the innocent construction rule could not be the subject of a section of a section 2-615 motion and treated it as affirmative matter raised under section 2-619 of the Code, where the plaintiff did not attach a copy of the article to her complaint as an exhibit or recite the article within the complaint.

2022App. 3d 966, 969 (1991)), if shielded under the innocent construction rule (Kolegas v. Heftel Broadcasting Corp., 154 Ill. 2d 1, 11 (1992)), if safeguarded as an expression of opinion (Mittelman v. Witous, 135 Ill. 2d 220, 239 (1989)), or if protected by a qualified privilege (Kuwik v. Starmark Star Marketing and Administration, Inc., 156 Ill. 2d 16 (1993)).

2006This court addressed the innocent construction rule again in Mittelman v. Witous, 135 Ill. 2d 220, 232 (1989), observing that “the law of defamation in general — and the innocent construction rule in particular — has spawned a morass of case law in which consistency and harmony have long ago disappeared.” Nevertheless, we did not abandon the innocent construction rule.

2025There are five categories of statements considered to be defamatory per se, including, as relevant here, words that impute that a person: “is unable to perform or lacks integrity in performing her or his employment duties”; “lacks ability or otherwise prejudices that person in her or his profession”; and “has committed a crime.” Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558, 579-80 (2006). ¶ 128 Under the innocent construction rule, even if a statement fits into one of the defamatory per se categories, it will not be actionable “if it is reasonably capable of an innocent

2009Therefore, we adhere to the rule stated in Chapski and recently reaffirmed in Solaia Technology, 221 Ill. 2d at 580-81 , to analyze whether the innocent construction rule applies to bar plaintiffs claim for defamation per se.

1987App. 3d 1019 , 483 N.E.2d 965 , this court held: “Plaintiff maintains that the circuit court erroneously applied the innocent construction rule to dismiss its complaint, which set forth a cause of action in libel per quod.

1987We disagree. * * * Illinois law is unsettled as to whether the innocent construction rule applies to actions in libel per quod, in addition to libel per se. [Citation.] Nonetheless, decisions considering allegedly defamatory language in libel per quod actions have evaluated such language in light of ‘related principles,’ suggesting that the words be read in context and given their natural and obvious meanings, and the complaint dismissed if the challenged words are not reasonably or fairly capable of the meaning assigned to them by the plaintiff. [Citations.]” 136 Ill.

1991Examining the statements in context, as required by the innocent construction rule, revealed them to be “ ‘an attorney’s biased presentation of his client’s view.’ ” (Owen, 113 Ill. 2d at 280 , 497 N.E.2d at 1148 .) As such, they were not actionable per se.

1991Examining the statements in context, as required by the innocent construction rule, revealed them to be “ ‘an attorney’s biased presentation of his client’s view.’ ” (Owen, 113 Ill. 2d at 280 , 497 N.E.2d at 1148 .) As such, they were not actionable per se.

2006Recognizing that the rule *131 had been applied in wildly divergent ways by our appellate court, the strongest argument this court could muster in defense of the innocent construction rule was "that it comports with the constitutional interests of free speech and free press and encourages the robust discussion of daily affairs." Chapski, 92 Ill.2d at 350 , 65 Ill.Dec. 884 , 442 N.E.2d 195 , citing Dauw v. Field Enterprises, Inc., 78 Ill.App.3d 67, 71 , 33 Ill.Dec. 708 , 397 N.E.2d 41 (1979).

2006Recognizing that the rule had been applied in wildly divergent ways by our appellate court, the strongest argument this court could muster in defense of the innocent construction rule was “that it comports with the constitutional interests of free speech and free press and encourages the robust discussion of daily affairs.” Chapski, 92 Ill. 2d at 350 , citing Dauw v. Field Enterprises, Inc., 78 Ill.

1996Perkaus v. Chicago Catholic High School Athletic League, 140 Ill.App.3d 127, 134 , 94 Ill.Dec. 624 , 488 N.E.2d 623 (1986) (where plaintiff failed to attach league bylaws as an exhibit to his complaint, defendants properly submitted the documents in support of a section 2-619(a)(9) motion to dismiss); Cartwright v. Garrison, 113 Ill.App.3d 536, 540 , 69 Ill.Dec. 229 , 447 N.E.2d 446 (1983) (in a defamation action, the question of whether the allegedly defamatory language is rendered nonactionable per se by reason of the innocent construction rule may properly be considered in a section 2-619 m

1996Perkaus v. Chicago Catholic High School Athletic League, 140 Ill.App.3d 127, 134 , 94 Ill.Dec. 624 , 488 N.E.2d 623 (1986) (where plaintiff failed to attach league bylaws as an exhibit to his complaint, defendants properly submitted the documents in support of a section 2-619(a)(9) motion to dismiss); Cartwright v. Garrison, 113 Ill.App.3d 536, 540 , 69 Ill.Dec. 229 , 447 N.E.2d 446 (1983) (in a defamation action, the question of whether the allegedly defamatory language is rendered nonactionable per se by reason of the innocent construction rule may properly be considered in a section 2-619 m

1967This innocent construction rule has been approved and underscored in other Illinois cases (Hambric v. Field Enterprises, 46 Ill.

1967This innocent construction rule has been approved and underscored in other Illinois cases (Hambric v. Field Enterprises, 46 Ill App2d 355, 358, 196 NE 2d 489 ; and cases cited).

2023Kolegas, 154 Ill. 2d at 11 ; see also Anderson v. Vanden Dorpel, 172 Ill. 2d 399, 413 (1996). ¶ 19 Plaintiffs allege the innocent construction rule does not defeat their claim because the quoted language in Steinberg’s article encompasses a sufficiently small group of Polish emigrants in the Chicago area who grew up in Poland during World War II.

1997The defendant cites to Anderson v. Vanden Dorpel , 172 Ill. 2d 399 (1996), to support his argument.

2021See Tuite v. Corbitt, 224 Ill. 2d 490, 509 (2006); Heerey v. Berke, 188 Ill.

1993App. 3d 527 , 544 N.E.2d 1037 .) Here, we find that the trial court properly applied the innocent construction rule to the per se action and that plaintiff has failed to plead facts sufficient to recover under the per quod theory of defamation.

2010However, even if we were to find that Opresnik’s statements imputed a criminal offense, “the innocent construction rule applies in determining whether a statement alleged to be defamatory per se imputes a criminal offense.” Kirchner, 294 Ill.

2010However, even if we were to find that Opresnik’s statements imputed a criminal offense, “the innocent construction rule applies in determining whether a statement alleged to be defamatory per se imputes a criminal offense.” Kirchner, 294 Ill.

2020Moriarty, 315 Ill.

2020Moriarty, 315 Ill.

1990See also Owens v. CBS, Inc. (1988), 173 Ill.App.3d 977 , 123 Ill.Dec. 521 , 527 N.E.2d 1296 . *153 When a newspaper publication is involved, the headline and news report to which it refers generally must be considered in its entirety, including the place and position of the item, to determine whether such publication is libelous under the innocent construction rule.

1990See also Owens v. CBS, Inc. (1988), 173 Ill.App.3d 977 , 123 Ill.Dec. 521 , 527 N.E.2d 1296 . *153 When a newspaper publication is involved, the headline and news report to which it refers generally must be considered in its entirety, including the place and position of the item, to determine whether such publication is libelous under the innocent construction rule.

1993App. 3d 597 , 410 N.E.2d 984 , the court found that words "lack of achievement” were subject to the innocent construction rule where a communication had been published that the bank employee did not perform up to the high standards expected of officers of the bank and therefore dismissed plaintiffs action.

1982App. 3d 338, 343 ) (“attempts to eliminate the innocent-construction rule have been consistently rejected by the courts of Illinois for many years in the past”); Kakuris v. Klein (1980), 88 Ill.