Under what circumstance can slander be actionable without proof of monetary loss?

Under what circumstance can slander be actionable without proof of monetary loss?

• A. When it is slander per se
• B. When the victim is a public figure
• C. When damages are large
• D. Never

Answer: (A)

The situation hinges on the concept of slander per se. Some defaming statements are so clearly harmful that the law does not require you to prove a specific monetary loss to sue; damages are presumed. These are statements that accuse someone of a crime, claim they have a loathsome disease, allege misconduct in their profession, or accuse immoral or sexual misconduct. When a statement falls into slander per se, the plaintiff may recover damages without showing they suffered a particular financial loss. So, the best answer is that slander can be actionable without proof of monetary loss when the statement is slander per se. The other ideas don’t fit because public figure status changes the fault standard (actual malice) rather than eliminating the need to show loss in general; large damages do not create an exception to proving loss; and “never” is incorrect because slander per se does allow recovery without proving monetary harm.

The situation hinges on the concept of slander per se. Some defaming statements are so clearly harmful that the law does not require you to prove a specific monetary loss to sue; damages are presumed. These are statements that accuse someone of a crime, claim they have a loathsome disease, allege misconduct in their profession, or accuse immoral or sexual misconduct. When a statement falls into slander per se, the plaintiff may recover damages without showing they suffered a particular financial loss.

So, the best answer is that slander can be actionable without proof of monetary loss when the statement is slander per se. The other ideas don’t fit because public figure status changes the fault standard (actual malice) rather than eliminating the need to show loss in general; large damages do not create an exception to proving loss; and “never” is incorrect because slander per se does allow recovery without proving monetary harm.