Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8344 (2026)

Malice or negligence necessary to support award of damages.

✓ current as of May 2026

Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 8344. Malice or negligence necessary to support award of damages.

In all civil actions for libel, no damages shall be recovered unless it is established to the satisfaction of the jury, under the direction of the court as in other cases, that the publication has been maliciously or negligently made, but where malice or negligence appears such damages may be awarded as the jury shall deem proper.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases, 1978–1994 · leading case: Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767 (1986).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767 (1986). · cites it 2× “42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8344 (1982). As to falsity, Pennsylvania follows the common law's presumption that an individual's reputation is a good one.”

Hepps v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc., 485 A.2d 374 (Pa. 1984). · cites it 3× “42 Pa.C.S. § 8344; Rosenbloom, supra, 403 U.”

Geyer v. Steinbronn, 506 A.2d 901 (Pa. 1986). · cites it 2× “Without actually using the word "malice," the court clearly instructed that the plaintiff must show that the publication was made intentionally, recklessly or negligently, defining all three.”

Medico, Philip T. v. Time, Inc, 643 F.2d 134 (3rd Cir. 1981). “2d at 909; 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 8344 (Supp.1979). This malice component is “implied or presumed to exist from the unprivileged publication of defamatory words actionable per se.”

Mathis v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc., 455 F. Supp. 406 (E.D. Pa. 1978). “, communication of the defamatory matter to a third person — the common law imposed “no liability for publication which the defendant did not intend and could not reasonably anticipate, as in the case of words spoken with no reason to suppose that anyone but the plaintiff would…”

Malia Et Ux. v. Monchak, 543 A.2d 184 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988). “42 Pa. C. S. §8344. This case, however, involves local agency employees and, as previously noted, they are subject to liability for negligent conduct in the performance of their duties only if the conduct fells within one of the eight exceptions to immunity in 42 Pa.”

Krochalis v. Ins. Co. of North Am., 629 F. Supp. 1360 (E.D. Pa. 1985). “See Restatement (Second) of Torts § 617(c) (“Subject to the control of the court ... the jury determines whether .”

Valley Forge Plaza Assocs. v. Rosen Agency, Inc. (In Re Valley Forge Plaza Assocs.), 113 B.R. 892 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1990). “Pennsylvania law limits the award of damages in a defamation action by the terms of 42 Pa.C.S. § 8344, which provides as follows: In all civil actions for libel, no damages shall be recovered unless it is established to the satisfaction of the jury, under the direction of the…”

Johnson v. Resources for Human Dev., Inc., 860 F. Supp. 218 (E.D. Pa. 1994). “Under Pennsylvaixia law, defamation claims must allege that the publisher acted “maliciously”, 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 8344 (1992), that is, with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth, Marcone, 754 F.”

U.S. Healthcare, Inc. v. Blue Cross of Greater Philadelphia, 898 F.2d 914 (1990). “2d 72 (1984); 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8344 (1988). Finally, the plaintiff has the burden of proving any special harm resulting from the statement.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.