Please visit my author page at amazon.com
Richard Bauer v. Bradley R. Brinkman. IA Defamation
The plaintiff in this Woodbury County, Iowa, case was the owner of an apartment building in Sloan, Iowa. He was embroiled in a controversy with the neighboring property owner, who opearted a dog care facility. As soon as construction began on the dog care, he became concerned about issues regarding dog feces. A lawsuit against the dog care and the city ensued.
The dog care posted on its Facebook page about the lawsuit and about cameras that had been installed on the exterior of the apartments. The owner's daughter also posted about the controversy on her personal facebook page. A friend of the dog care's owner then made a post in reply in which he called the plaintiff a piece of s*** and a "Slum Lord."
The plaintiff then sued for defamation. The trial court tossed out the case, and the plaintiff appealed. The appeal was ultimately heard by the Iowa Supreme Court. The high court noted that statements that cannot be reasonably interpreted as stating actual facts about a person are not actionable as defamation. The case hinged, therefore, on whether the term "slum lord" was a statement of fact, or a protected expression of opinion.
The court concluded, as had the lower court, that this was a mere statement of opinion. It first pointed out that the statement does not have a precise meaning, and is not one that is objectively capable of proof or disproof.
The plaintiff pointed to an online legal definition of the word "slumlord," and also pointed out that Iowa Code 403.17(22) contains a definition of the word "slum." The court noted that in some contexts, it might be possible to apply a precise definition to the word. But in this case, it was "obvious it was meant only as name-calling and an insult."
The court also noted that this was a single excited utterance, and there was no attempt to provide any factual support for the assertion. For these reasons, the statement was not one of fact, and the Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the case.
No. 20-0563 (Iowa Apr. 16, 2021).
Please see the original opinion for the court's exact language.
Advertisement:
Richard P. Clem is an attorney and continuing legal education (CLE) provider in Minnesota. He has been in private practice in the Twin Cities for 25 years. He has a J.D., cum laude, from Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul and a B.A. in History from the University of Minnesota. His reported cases include: Asociacion Nacional de Pescadores a Pequena Escala o Artesanales de Colombia v. Dow Quimica de Colombia, 988 F.2d 559, rehearing denied, 5 F.3d 530 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1041 (1994); LaMott v. Apple Valley Health Care Center, 465 N.W.2d 585 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991); Abo el Ela v. State, 468 N.W.2d 580 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991).
For more information about attorney Clem, please visit
his website.
For more information about his
low-cost CLE programs, please visit his CLE page.
Return to index of case
summaries
Copyright 2021, Richard P. Clem.
Attorney Richard P. Clem is responsible for the content of this page.
Richard P. Clem, Attorney
PO Box 14957
Minneapolis, MN 55414
USA
Phone: +1-612-378-7751
e-mail: clem.law@usa.net
Minnesota Attorney Registration Number 0192648
Please visit my author page at amazon.com