Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
22 Ohio opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2026 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Gosden v. Louisgreen2 sentences2026“To prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must prove five elements: ‘(1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) about plaintiff; (3) published without privilege to a third party; (4) with fault of at least negligence on the part of the defendant; and (5) that was either defamatory per se or caused special harm to the plaintiff.’” Jacobs v. Budak, 2004-Ohio-522, ¶ 50 (11th Dist.), quoting Gosden v. Louis, 116 Ohio App.3d 195, 206 (9th Dist. 1996). {¶44} The trial court found as follows: The alleged defamatory statements in this case were made by Mr. Pettrey to Mr. Mack. 2022Libel is generally defined “as a false written publication, made with some degree of fault, reflecting injuriously on a person’s reputation, or exposing a person to public hatred, contempt, ridicule, shame or disgrace, or affecting a person adversely in his or her trade, business or profession.” A & B-Abell Elevator Co., Inc., 73 Ohio St.3d at 7 . {¶57} To prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must prove five elements: “(1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) about plaintiff; (3) published without privilege to a third party; (4) with fault of at least negligence on the part of the defendant; | 4 | 9 |
Melnyk v. Cleveland Clinicgreen2 sentences2024The 2011 email provides the exact date and time that it was sent as well as the sender and all recipients. “[A]s problems of proof and defense dwindle, so does the persuasiveness of the ‘stale claims’ reasoning.” Melnyk v. Cleveland Clinic, 32 Ohio St.2d 198, 200 (1972). 2024The 2011 email provides the exact date and time that it was sent as well as the sender and all recipients. “[A]s problems of proof and defense dwindle, so does the persuasiveness of the ‘stale claims’ reasoning.” Melnyk v. Cleveland Clinic, 32 Ohio St.2d 198 , 200 (1972). | 2 | 2 |
Investors REIT One v. Jacobsgreen2 sentences2024Other examples of statutes that specify when a cause of action accrues include R.C. 2305.07(C) (cause of action for a claim arising out of a consumer transaction “accrues thirty calendar days after the date of the last charge or payment by, or on behalf of, the consumer, whichever is later”); R.C. 2305.091(B) (cause of action by a board of education for asbestos abatement in a board-owned building accrues “upon the date that the board of education is informed” by a certain specified entity that there is asbestos that should be removed because it poses a health hazard to users of the building); 2024Other examples of statutes that specify when a cause of action accrues include R.C. 2305.07(C) (cause of action for a claim arising out of a consumer transaction “accrues thirty calendar days after the date of the last charge or payment by, or on behalf of, the consumer, whichever is later”); R.C. 2305.091(B) (cause of action by a board of education for asbestos abatement in a board-owned building accrues “upon the date that the board of education is informed” by a certain specified entity that there is asbestos that should be removed because it poses a health hazard to users of the building); | 2 | 2 |
Jacobs v. Budakgreen2 sentences2026“To prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must prove five elements: ‘(1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) about plaintiff; (3) published without privilege to a third party; (4) with fault of at least negligence on the part of the defendant; and (5) that was either defamatory per se or caused special harm to the plaintiff.’” Jacobs v. Budak, 2004-Ohio-522, ¶ 50 (11th Dist.), quoting Gosden v. Louis, 116 Ohio App.3d 195, 206 (9th Dist. 1996). {¶44} The trial court found as follows: The alleged defamatory statements in this case were made by Mr. Pettrey to Mr. Mack. 2008Jacobs v. Budak (2004), 156 Ohio App.3d 160 , 805 N.E.2d 111 {¶ 34} "Libel per se means libel of itself, or upon the face of a publication, whereas libel per quod is libel by an interpretation, through an innuendo, between an innocent or harmless meaning and a libelous one." Becker v. Toulmin (1956), 165 Ohio St. 549 , 556 , 138 N.E.2d 391 . | 1 | 2 |
Fred Siegel Co., L.P.A. v. Arter & Haddengreen1 sentence2024No. 23AP-116, 2024-Ohio-824, ¶ 21 , citing Fred Siegel Co., L.P.A. v. Arter & Hadden, 85 Ohio St.3d 171, 176 (1999). | 1 | 1 |
Sethi v. Wfmj Television Inc.green1 sentence2002See Sethi v. WFMJ Television, Inc. (1999), 134 Ohio App.3d 796 , 732 N.E.2d 451 (applying the traditional libel standard to a television broadcast). | 1 | 1 |
Greenbelt Cooperative Publishing Assn., Inc. v. Breslergreen1 sentence2000See, Greenbelt Cooperative Publishing Assn. v. Bresler (1970), 398 U.S. 6 , where the court rejected a libel claim filed by a real estate developer who had been negotiating with a local city council regarding a zoning variance and the newspaper had reported the negotiations as "blackmail". | 1 | 1 |
New York Times Co. v. Sullivangreen2 sentences1996See New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), 376 U.S. 254, 278-280 , 84 S.Ct. 710, 725-726 , 11 L.Ed.2d 686, 705-707 ; Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974), 418 U.S. 323, 340-341 , 94 S.Ct. 2997, 3007-3008 , 41 L.Ed.2d 789, 805-806 . 1996See New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), 376 U.S. 254, 278-280 , 84 S.Ct. 710, 725-726 , 11 L.Ed.2d 686, 705-707 ; Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974), 418 U.S. 323, 340-341 , 94 S.Ct. 2997, 3007-3008 , 41 L.Ed.2d 789, 805-806 . | 1 | 1 |
Shifflet v. Thomson Newspapers (Ohio), Inc.green2 sentences1996In all such actions any mitigating circumstances may be proved to reduce damages.” (Emphasis added.) See, also, Shifflet v. Thomson Newspapers, Inc. (1982), 69 Ohio St.2d 179, 183 , 23 O.O.3d 205, 207 , 431 N.E.2d 1014, 1017 (“Since truth is always a defense in any action for libel or slander, appellants’ claim on these grounds must fail.” [Footnote omitted.]). {¶ 49} In considering the letter at issue, the court of appeals held that “[s]ummary judgment was properly granted on the issue of ‘truth.’” We agree with the findings of the trial court and the court of appeals that the truth of the le 1996In all such actions any mitigating circumstances may be proved to reduce damages.” (Emphasis added.) See, also, Shifflet v. Thomson Newspapers, Inc. (1982), 69 Ohio St.2d 179, 183 , 23 O.O.3d 205, 207 , 431 N.E.2d 1014, 1017 (“Since truth is always a defense in any action for libel or slander, appellants’ claim on these grounds must fail.” [Footnote omitted.]). {¶ 49} In considering the letter at issue, the court of appeals held that “[s]ummary judgment was properly granted on the issue of ‘truth.’” We agree with the findings of the trial court and the court of appeals that the truth of the le | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
A & B-Abell Elevator Co. v. Columbus/Central Ohio Building & Construction Trades Council
green
2 sentences2022Libel is generally defined “as a false written publication, made with some degree of fault, reflecting injuriously on a person’s reputation, or exposing a person to public hatred, contempt, ridicule, shame or disgrace, or affecting a person adversely in his or her trade, business or profession.” A & B-Abell Elevator Co., Inc., 73 Ohio St.3d at 7 . {¶57} To prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must prove five elements: “(1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) about plaintiff; (3) published without privilege to a third party; (4) with fault of at least negligence on the part of the defendant; 2008Trades Council (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 1 , 7 , 651 N.E.2d 1283 , 1995-Ohio-66 . {¶ 33} To prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must prove five elements: "(1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) about plaintiff; (3) published without privilege to a third party; (4) with fault of at least negligence on the part of the defendant; and (5) that was either defamatory per se or caused special harm to the *Page 16 plaintiff." Gosden v. Louis (1996), 116 Ohio App.3d 195 , 206 , 687 N.E.2d 481 . | 3 | 2008–2022 |
Dale v. Ohio Civil Service Employees Ass'n
green
2 sentences2008Trades Council (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 1 , 7 . *Page 13 {¶ 48} Further, "[t]o prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must prove five elements: `(1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) about plaintiff; (3) published without privilege to a third party; (4) with fault of at least negligence on the part of the defendant; and (5) that was either defamatory per se or caused special harm to the plaintiff [libel per quod].'" Jacobs I at ¶ 50, citing Gosden v. Louis (1996), 116 Ohio App. 3d 195 , 206 . {¶ 49} In Lansdowne , supra, the Supreme Court of Ohio took a further step, which imposed a higher bur 2006Dale , supra, 57 Ohio St.3d 112 . | 3 | 2004–2008 |
Bruss v. Vindicator Printing Co.
green
2 sentences2008Bruss v. Vindicator Printing Co. (1996), 109 Ohio App.3d 396 , 399 ; A B-Abell Elevator Co. v. Columbus/Cent. 2004Bruss v. Vindicator Printing Co. (1996), 109 Ohio App.3d 396 , 399 . {¶ 14} To survive a motion for summary judgment in a defamation action, a plaintiff must make a sufficient showing as to each of the five essential elements of the case. | 2 | 2004–2008 |
Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell
green
2 sentences1992In the trial court, a jury returned a verdict in favor of Hustler on the libel claim, specifically finding that the ad parody could not “reasonably be understood as describing actual fact * * Hustler, supra, 485 U.S. at 49 , 108 S.Ct. at 878 , 99 L.Ed.2d at 47 . 1992In the trial court, a jury returned a verdict in favor of Hustler on the libel claim, specifically finding that the ad parody could not “reasonably be understood as describing actual fact * * Hustler, supra, 485 U.S. at 49 , 108 S.Ct. at 878 , 99 L.Ed.2d at 47 . | 2 | 1988–1992 |
Innovative Architectural Planners, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Adm. Servs.
green
1 sentence2024No. 23AP-116, 2024-Ohio-824, ¶ 21 , citing Fred Siegel Co., L.P.A. v. Arter & Hadden, 85 Ohio St.3d 171, 176 (1999). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Dupler v. Mansfield Journal Co.
green
2 sentences2023Dupler v. Mansfield Journal Co., 64 Ohio St.2d 116, 121-123 , 413 N.E.2d 1187 (1980) (explaining how the clear and convincing evidentiary standard applies to summary judgment for actual malice in a libel claim). 2023Dupler v. Mansfield Journal Co., 64 Ohio St.2d 116, 121-123 , 413 N.E.2d 1187 (1980) (explaining how the clear and convincing evidentiary standard applies to summary judgment for actual malice in a libel claim). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Lansdowne v. Beacon Journal Publishing Co.
green
1 sentence2008Trades Council (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 1 , 7 . *Page 13 {¶ 48} Further, "[t]o prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must prove five elements: `(1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) about plaintiff; (3) published without privilege to a third party; (4) with fault of at least negligence on the part of the defendant; and (5) that was either defamatory per se or caused special harm to the plaintiff [libel per quod].'" Jacobs I at ¶ 50, citing Gosden v. Louis (1996), 116 Ohio App. 3d 195 , 206 . {¶ 49} In Lansdowne , supra, the Supreme Court of Ohio took a further step, which imposed a higher bur | 1 | 2008–2008 |
A & B-Abell Elevator Co. v. Columbus/Cent. Ohio Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council
green
1 sentence2008Trades Council (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 1 , 7 , 651 N.E.2d 1283 , 1995-Ohio-66 . {¶ 33} To prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must prove five elements: "(1) a false and defamatory statement; (2) about plaintiff; (3) published without privilege to a third party; (4) with fault of at least negligence on the part of the defendant; and (5) that was either defamatory per se or caused special harm to the *Page 16 plaintiff." Gosden v. Louis (1996), 116 Ohio App.3d 195 , 206 , 687 N.E.2d 481 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Cooke v. United Dairy Farmers, Inc., Unpublished Decision (3-31-2005)
neutral
1 sentence2005Id. {¶ 24} To prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must demonstrate the existence of a false and defamatory statement published without privilege to a third party with fault of at least negligence on the part of the publisher. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Byrd v. Faber
green
2 sentences2005Byrd v. Faber (1991), 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 . {¶ 33} To prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must prove five elements: “(1) a false and defamatory statement, (2) about plaintiff, (3) published without privilege to a third party, (4) with fault of at least negligence on the part of the defendant, and (5) that was either defamatory per se or caused special harm to the plaintiff.” Gosden v. Louis (1996), 116 Ohio App.3d 195, 206 , 687 N.E.2d 481 . 2005Byrd v. Faber (1991), 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 . {¶ 33} To prevail on a libel claim, a plaintiff must prove five elements: “(1) a false and defamatory statement, (2) about plaintiff, (3) published without privilege to a third party, (4) with fault of at least negligence on the part of the defendant, and (5) that was either defamatory per se or caused special harm to the plaintiff.” Gosden v. Louis (1996), 116 Ohio App.3d 195, 206 , 687 N.E.2d 481 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Dotson v. Brondes Motor Sales, Inc.
green
1 sentence2000Pursuant to the statute, a consumer is entitled to treble damages if the act complained of was "specifically prohibited by a regulation promulgated by the Attorney General pursuant to R.C. 1345.05 (B)(2) [or] a deceptive act as determined by a prior court decision." Dotson v. Brondes Motor Sales, Inc . (1993), 90 Ohio App.3d 206 , 209 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Bell v. Horton
green
1 sentence1999"Affirmative defenses such as privilege (see Civ.R. 8[C]) generally are not properly raised in a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion because they usually require reference to materials outside the complaint." Bell v. Horton (1995), 107 Ohio App.3d 824 , 826 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.
green
2 sentences1996See New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), 376 U.S. 254, 278-280 , 84 S.Ct. 710, 725-726 , 11 L.Ed.2d 686, 705-707 ; Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974), 418 U.S. 323, 340-341 , 94 S.Ct. 2997, 3007-3008 , 41 L.Ed.2d 789, 805-806 . 1996See New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), 376 U.S. 254, 278-280 , 84 S.Ct. 710, 725-726 , 11 L.Ed.2d 686, 705-707 ; Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974), 418 U.S. 323, 340-341 , 94 S.Ct. 2997, 3007-3008 , 41 L.Ed.2d 789, 805-806 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.