Einhorn v. LaChance

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding statement that plaintiff was \fired for reasons relating 'solely to work performance' \ was not defamatory as a matter of law because it was a nonspecific statement
• finding statement that employee was fired for reasons relating “solely to work performance” was nonspecific and was not capable of defamatory meaning
• statement that plaintiff was fired for reasons related “solely to work performance” not defamatory
• “[T]he references to appellants as incompetent, troublemakers, and liars are assertions of pure opinion . . . Therefore, as to each of these statements, the absolute constitutional privilege applies.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).