134 So. 3d 653
La. Ct. App.2014Background
- Reverend Norwood Thompson Jr. was pastor of First Zion Baptist Church; disputes arose after Bank One mistakenly credited a $50,000 CD to the Church and trustees removed Thompson and his wife as signatories.
- Trustee and Deacon board members (the Church Defendants) confronted Thompson, accused him of embezzlement, and later filed a separate 2000 lawsuit alleging misappropriation and missing church property.
- Thompson sued the Church Defendants and Bank One for defamation and injunctive relief in October 1999; extensive procedural history included injunctions, appeals, and collateral proceedings.
- At a 2012 bench trial Thompson proved defamatory statements (per se) and publication through the 2000 lawsuit and other acts; most defendants did not testify and the trial court applied the uncalled-witness adverse-presumption.
- The trial court awarded substantial special damages (back pay, lost pastoral payments, fringe benefits) and $150,000 general damages; the court apportioned fault (70% Church Defendants, 30% Bank One). The Fourth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statements accused of embezzlement and calling Thompson a thief/liar are defamation per se | Thompson: These accusations impute criminal conduct and harm his pastoral reputation; falsity and malice are presumed | Church: Allegations were civil/administrative concerns about church funds (not per se criminal); later filings/broadcasts not part of original petition | Court: Statements (including lawsuit allegations) were defamatory per se because they accused criminal conduct and harmed professional reputation; presumption of falsity/malice applies |
| Whether the 2000 lawsuit and other communications constituted unprivileged publication to third parties | Thompson: Filing and related actions published the defamatory accusations; publication established by circumstantial evidence and by defendants’ failure to testify | Church: The 2000 lawsuit was a judicial communication entitled to qualified privilege; Fox-8 broadcast was irrelevant or prejudicial | Court: Qualified privilege inapplicable because defendants lacked good-faith grounds after being told Bank One erred; publication established; uncalled-witness rule supported finding defendants failed to rebut malice |
| Whether plaintiff proved injury causally related to the defamation | Thompson: Loss of pastoral position, salary, pension, insurance, and inability to secure similar employment because of defamation | Church: Contest damage causation and duration (physician letter suggested inability to work after 2006) | Court: Injury proved; physician testimony plus evidence of Thompson’s ongoing community roles supported damages through 2012 |
| Whether damages awarded (special and general) were excessive or unsupported | Thompson: Expert economist calculated back pay and benefit losses; seeks consortium award for spouse (not properly before court) | Church: Awards should be reduced (e.g., end date 2006 per physician letter); general damages excessive | Court: Damage calculations (based on expert) and $150,000 general award were within trial court discretion and not a manifest abuse; spouse’s consortium claim not before appellate court |
Key Cases Cited
- Kennedy v. Sheriff of East Baton Rouge, 935 So.2d 669 (La. 2006) (elements of defamation and fault discussed)
- Costello v. Hardy, 864 So.2d 129 (La. 2004) (falsity and malice presumptions for defamation per se)
- Stobart v. State, Dep’t of Transp. & Dev., 617 So.2d 880 (La. 1993) (manifest-error standard and factfinder deference)
- Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840 (La. 1989) (circumstances when appellate court may overturn credibility findings)
- Zito v. Advanced Emergency Medical Servs., Inc., 89 So.3d 372 (La. 2012) (summary of manifest-error review)
- Sommer v. State, Dep’t of Transp. & Dev., 758 So.2d 923 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2000) (great discretion in awarding damages; ‘shocks the conscience’ standard)
- Melancon v. Hyatt Corp., 589 So.2d 1186 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1991) (accusation of stealing establishes defamation per se)
- Driscoll v. Stucker, 893 So.2d 32 (La. 2005) (uncalled-witness rule and adverse presumption)
- Boulos v. Morrison, 503 So.2d 1 (La. 1987) (principles on agent authority and apparent authority)