Gast v. Brittain
| Decision Date | 10 November 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. S03G0716.,S03G0716. |
| Citation | 589 S.E.2d 63,277 Ga. 340 |
| Parties | GAST v. BRITTAIN. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Seacrest, Karesh, Tate & Bicknese, LLP, Karsten Bicknese, Daniel S. Wright, Atlanta, Stanley Durden, P.C., Athens, for appellant.
David W. Griffeth, Athens, for appellee.
We granted certiorari in this case to determine whether the Court of Appeals correctly held that a letter written by the defendant, Andrew Gast, could reasonably be interpreted to state or imply defamatory facts about the plaintiff, Doyle Brittain, Sr. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to Gast and held that his letter could imply objective defamatory facts that are capable of being proved false.1 Because the letter does not constitute actionable libel, however, we reverse.
Before sending the letter that became the basis of this suit, Gast was an Eagle Scout youth leader in the Boy Scout Troop run by Brittain and other adult leaders. During the course of that relationship, Gast became disillusioned with the Troop's leadership. Gast submitted his resignation from the Troop by letter, which he sent to certain people involved in the Troop and the parents of the boy scouts. In the letter, Gast described the reasons for his resignation. In the only portions of the letter possibly relevant to Brittain, Gast claimed that Brittain was "immoral" and did not live his life according to the "ideals of Scouting." Gast also asserted that Brittain had disputed whether anything wrong had occurred after Gast presented his grievances at a meeting of the Troop leadership.
Shortly after circulation of the letter, Brittain brought this action for libel. Gast, in his motion for summary judgment, argued that the only references in the letter to Brittain were expressions of non-actionable opinion. The trial court granted Gast's motion for summary judgment, concluding that Gast's opinions about Brittain did not constitute actionable libel. The Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that a question of fact existed as to whether Gast's opinions implied defamatory facts about Brittain that were capable of being proved false. This Court granted certiorari.
Gast's assertions regarding "immorality" and the "ideals of Scouting" are plainly the sorts of opinions that are incapable of being proved false.3 For such matters, "we depend for [their] correction not on the conscience of judges and juries but on the competition of other ideas."4
There is, however, no "wholesale defamation exception for anything that might be labeled opinion."5 An opinion can constitute actionable defamation if the opinion can reasonably be interpreted, according to the context of the entire writing in which the opinion appears, to state or imply defamatory facts about the plaintiff that are capable of being proved false.6
The next question, therefore, is whether Gast's opinions could reasonably be interpreted to state or imply any defamatory facts about Brittain that are capable of being proved false. Accusations of child abuse and other improper conduct against a particular leader of the Troop form the essential basis of Gast's letter. Gast's letter clearly assigns responsibility for this conduct to a person other than Brittain, however. Where there is a clear delineation between allegations of improper conduct and allegations directed at the plaintiff, the allegations of improper conduct will not create a libel action for the plaintiff.7 In this case, Gast's letter refers to specific criminal conduct, but clearly separates those allegations, aimed at...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cousins v. Goodier
...a suit for libel, a statement is not actionable unless it asserts a provably false fact or factual connotation."); Gast v. Brittain , 277 Ga. 340, 589 S.E.2d 63, 64 (2003) ("An opinion can constitute actionable defamation if the opinion can reasonably be interpreted, according to the contex......
-
Mar–jac Poultry Inc. v. Katz
...that she was uncertain whether funds from any alleged scheme involving Mar–Jac were going to terrorists. See Gast v. Brittain, 277 Ga. 340, 589 S.E.2d 63, 64 (2003) (“Where there is a clear delineation between allegations of improper conduct and allegations directed at the plaintiff, the al......
-
Adventure Outdoors, Inc. v. Bloomberg
...on a motion to dismiss. Finally, Defendants contend that their statements are non-actionable statements of opinion. In Gast v. Brittain, 277 Ga. 340, 589 S.E.2d 63 (2003), the plaintiff, who was a Boy Scout leader, filed a libel claim against a former youth group leader who circulated a let......
-
Echols v. Lawton
...of Torts § 558 (Am. Law Inst. 1977) ). A statement is not actionable as defamation when it conveys a pure opinion, Gast v. Brittain , 277 Ga. 340, 589 S.E.2d 63, 64 (2003), or a true statement of fact, O.C.G.A. § 51-5-6. When we consider whether a statement is defamatory, we "read and const......
-
Torts - Deron R. Hicks
...Id. (citations omitted). 44. Id. at 540-41, 586 S.E.2d at 74. 45. Id. at 540, 586 S.E.2d at 74. 46. Id. at 540-41, 586 S.E.2d at 74. 47. 277 Ga. 340, 589 S.E.2d 63 (2003). 48. Id. at 340, 589 S.E.2d at 63. 49. Id. 50. Id., 589 S.E.2d at 64. 51. Id. 52. Id. 53. Id. 54. Id. 55. Id. 56. Id. at......
-
Torts - Deron R. Hicks and Travis C. Hargrove
...241 Ga. App. at 156, 526 S.E.2d at 377). 98. Id. at 638, 631 S.E.2d 695-96. 99. Id., 631 S.E.2d at 696. 100. Id. (citing Gast v. Brittain, 277 Ga. 340, 340-41, 589 S.E.2d 63, 64 (2003)). 101. Id. (citing Gast, 277 Ga. at 340-41, 589 S.E.2d at 64). 102. Id. (citing Milkovich v. Lorain Journa......
-
Torts - Deron R. Hicks and Travis C. Hargrove
...(2002)). 29. Id. at 261, 677 S.E.2d at 153. 30. Id. 31. Id., 677 S.E.2d at 153-54. 32. Id., 677 S.E.2d at 154 (quoting Gast v. Brittain, 277 Ga. 340, 341, 589 S.E.2d 63, 64 (2003)). 33. Id. at 261-62, 677 S.E.2d at 154. 34. Id. 35. Id. at 262, 677 S.E.2d at 154. 36. Id. 37. Id. 38. Id. at 2......
-
Criminal Law
...at 60.42. Id. at 673, 859 S.E.2d at 59-60.43. Id. at 674, 859 S.E.2d at 60.44. Id.45. Id. at 678, 859 S.E.2d at 63.46. Id. at 678-79, 589 S.E.2d at 63.47. 319 Ga. App. 718, 738 S.E.2d 304 (2013). 48. Maxwell, 311 Ga. at 679, 589 S.E.2d at 63 (quoting Johns, 319 Ga. App. at 719, 738 S.E.2d a......