Moon v. Liu
44 N.E.3d 1134
Ill. App. Ct.2016Background
- Moon, a deacon at Lakeview Korean Presbyterian Church, sued 20 church members after they circulated a May 19, 2013 memorandum titled “Reprimand of Deacon Moon.”
- The memorandum listed multiple alleged misconducts; Moon challenged only the statement that he had "threatened verbally to report the details of church members’ offerings to the IRS."
- Moon alleged reputational harm in the Korean community, cultural dishonor affecting his children, and that his wife referenced church complaints in filing for divorce; he claimed attorney fees from the divorce as special damages.
- Defendants moved to dismiss under 735 ILCS 5/2-615, arguing Moon failed to plead special damages for defamation per quod, could not plead actual malice for false light, and lacked proximate cause and sufficient facts for intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED).
- The trial court dismissed Moon’s first amended complaint with prejudice; Moon appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Defamation per quod — special damages | Moon: wife’s divorce petition referenced church complaints and he incurred attorney fees caused by defendants’ memorandum, satisfying special damages | Defs: no causal link between the challenged IRS allegation and the divorce; attorney fees speculative and not proximately caused by that specific statement | Dismissed: Moon failed to plead special damages causally connected to the specific defamatory allegation |
| Defamation characterization / injurious meaning | Moon: extrinsic facts about Korean honor culture and immigrant fear of government render the IRS-threat allegation injurious per quod | Defs: statement not defamatory per se; injury requires extrinsic facts plus special damages | Court accepted potential injurious meaning but dismissed for lack of special damages |
| False light invasion of privacy — offensiveness & malice | Moon: statement placed him in false light offensive to the greater Chicago Korean community and alleged actual malice | Defs: Moon cannot show offensiveness to a reasonable person (only to his community) or actual malice; also lacks special damages | Dismissed: no facts showing false light would be highly offensive to a reasonable person and special damages absent; claim fails for lack of actual malice support |
| Intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) — extreme/outrageous conduct & causation | Moon: defendants intended or knew their publication would cause severe distress | Defs: circulation of a church memorandum is not extreme/outrageous; Moon’s pleading is conclusory and lacks specific facts | Dismissed: allegations are conclusory; the conduct alleged does not meet the very high threshold for IIED |
Key Cases Cited
- Green v. Rogers, 234 Ill. 2d 478 (procedural standard for 2-615 dismissal)
- Bryson v. News Am. Publ’ns, Inc., 174 Ill. 2d 77 (requirement to plead special damages for defamation per quod)
- Kolegas v. Heftel Broad. Corp., 154 Ill. 2d 1 (definitions and categories of defamatory per se)
- Lovgren v. Citizens First Nat’l Bank of Princeton, 126 Ill. 2d 411 (reasonable-person standard for offensiveness in false light claims)
- McGrath v. Fahey, 126 Ill. 2d 78 (elements and high threshold for IIED)
- Public Finance Corp. v. Davis, 66 Ill. 2d 85 (examples of conduct not meeting IIED standard)
- Ziemba v. Mierzwa, 142 Ill. 2d 42 (conclusory allegations disregarded on 2-615 review)
- Kurczaba v. Pollock, 318 Ill. App. 3d 686 (elements of false light invasion of privacy)
- Schaffer v. Zekman, 196 Ill. App. 3d 727 (special damages requirement for false light claims based on non-per-se statements)