Piccone v. Bartels, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that disputed term conveyed opinion in context even though same term could refer to sufficiently objective standard in another context
• explaining that, even if statement that plaintiff was “unprofessional” was provably false, it was not actionable because defendant disclosed the facts upon which he based his statement
• explaining that, even if statement that plaintiff was “unprofessional” was provably false, it was not actionable because defendant disclosed the facts upon which he based his statement
• noting that such statements are “immun[ ]e ... from defamation liability”
• collecting First Circuit cases which have rejected defamation claims based on the words “trashy,” “fake” and “phony,” and “scam”
• \[T]he speaker can immunize his statement from defamation liability by fully disclosing the non-defamatory facts on which his opinion is based.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).