|
4845 A plaintiff claiming she was defamed by false statements about the reason for her termination made by her former employer to the Employment Development Department cannot establish damage, and therefore cannot make out a prima facie case, if she received the benefits for which she applied; if a plaintiff is under a strong compulsion to repeat defamatory statements made to plaintiff about plaintiff, the repetitions might constitute publication by defendant to a third person, but only if plaintiff actually does repeat those statements.CitationDIBLE v HAIGHT ASHBURY FREE CLINICS (Defamed Psychologist) 170 CA4 843 [See: CCP 425.16; CivC 46; Kibler v Inyo 39 C4 192, P/AT 9/06; Fontani v Wells Fargo 129 CA4 719, T/AT 7/05 & P/AT 7/05; Smith v Maldonado 72 CA4 637, T/AT 7/99; McKinney v County 110 CA3 787; Shoemaker v Friedberg 80 CA2 911; Davis v Consolidated 29 CA4 354, T/AT 11/94]
|
|
