Also known as: private individuals · private person
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A person who is not a public official or public figure. Such a person need not prove actual malice to recover damages for defamation. States may set the standard of liability so long as they do not impose liability without fault. Recovery of presumed or punitive damages still requires a showing of actual malice.
Phuong Pham, a local accountant, learns that a newspaper published a false report accusing her of embezzlement. She sues for defamation. Because she is a private individual, she need only prove negligence rather than actual malice to establish liability. She may also recover actual damages without showing malice, though presumed or punitive damages require that additional showing.
Penelope Price, a local resident, sues a former president for false statements accusing her of misconduct in a private business deal. As a private individual, she need only prove negligence rather than actual malice to establish liability. She may recover actual damages without showing malice, though presumed or punitive damages require that additional showing.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Patrick Phan, a local resident, sues federal agents for false statements accusing him of criminal activity. As a private individual, he need only prove negligence rather than actual malice to establish liability. He may recover actual damages without showing malice, though presumed or punitive damages require that additional showing.
Priya Prasad, a scientist who received public grants, sues a senator for statements criticizing her research as wasteful. The court determines she is a public figure because of her voluntary involvement with public funds. As a result, she must prove actual malice even though she began as a private individual.
Perry Pratt, owner of a small construction firm, sues a credit agency for a false report that harmed his business. Because the report concerned a private individual and was not a matter of public concern, he may recover presumed damages without proving actual malice under the applicable standard.
Peter Park, a local resident who provided information to a newspaper, sues after the paper publishes false statements about him. As a private individual, he need only prove negligence rather than actual malice to establish liability. He may recover actual damages without showing malice, though presumed or punitive damages require that additional showing.
A private individual need only prove negligence or another fault standard chosen by the state, provided the state does not impose liability without fault. Actual malice is not required for compensatory damages.
Supporting sources
No. Even a private individual must show actual malice to recover presumed or punitive damages. The rule prevents windfall recoveries without proof of knowing or reckless falsehood.
Supporting sources
Private individuals have not voluntarily assumed a role of public prominence and lack ready access to channels of communication to rebut falsehoods. Public figures must prove actual malice in all defamation cases.
Supporting sources
…with bodily integrity to prevent a felony. That general rule has of course been applied to suicide. At common law, even a private person's use of force to prevent suicide was privileged. It is not even reasonable, much less required by the Constitution, to maintain that although the State has the right to prevent a person…