Can an attorney help with some slander question's?

[madison86]

Can a person be sued for it? If so what evidence is needed? What type of attorney would be needed?

The person that is slandering is an abuser a sociopath one. So please if you can help would be appreciated?

[jomei69]

Someone can be sued for slander. You'll need to be able to prove, generally, that the statements were made with malice, and caused measurable financial damage to you in order for your lawsuit to be successful.

[dalon]

Someone can be sued for slander. You'll need to be able to prove, generally, that the statements were made with malice, and caused measurable financial damage to you in order for your lawsuit to be successful.

"The person that is slandering is an abuser a sociopath one." Duh... did you, like, leave out half of the words?

[deangelo51]

Slander means verbally making untrue statements that harm another person in some way. The statements must be factual (not simple opinion), they must be incorrect and the accused must KNOW that they are incorrect, they must be made to a third party, they must cause actual damage (loss of job, etc)

Truth is never slander, nor is opinion.

Yes, you can sue for your actual damages, but winning is very difficult.

[adusa37]

Sure can, call one and make an appointment

[barnett]

Probably.

But first you have to know what is and what is not slander (and libel, the other kind of defamation). You should also know that falsely accusing another is a criminal offense in some jurisdictions. Filing a lawsuit that has no basis can be considered harassment and legal abuse, and you may be liable to court sanctions and civil damages. Ex-spouses often accuse each other of various things, true, untrue, or exaggerated. You would need really good evidence to succeed.

[torran]

Slander (spoken) and libel (written) are both covered by the defamation of character umbrella. To prove defamation, the plaintiff must prove four elements:

1) Communication of the statement was made to at least one third party.
2) The communication was a false statement of fact.
3) The communication was understood to be about the plaintiff.
4) The communication resulted in serious harm to the plaintiff's reputation.

Only if the plaintiff is a public figure must malice also be established. However, judges hate frivolous defamation cases where no real damage was caused. Also, there is a general rule that trying to disguise defamation as an opinion (e.g., "I think John Smith is a liar and a thief") is no defense. Any competent general practice attorney can handle a defamation case.