According to Dever v. Dugan, a case decided by the Vermont Supreme Court panel consisting of Harold E. Eaton, Jr., Karen R. Carroll, and Nancy J. Waples on June 12, the following events took place:
Plaintiff was working at Amy’s Bakery in Brattleboro, and Dugan was the property owner where the business was situated.
In his complaint, the Plaintiff alleged that Dugan claimed he had the right to approve or deny anyone working in or on his building and expressed that he would not allow the Plaintiff to work there due to his history of suing past employers. Dugan even threatened to evict the bakery owner, Comerchero, if she did not terminate the Plaintiff immediately.
Additionally, the Plaintiff claimed that Dugan provided Comerchero with a list of cases the Plaintiff had been involved in, which was used in a breach-of-contract case against him. Although the Plaintiff referred to this list as “malicious defamation,” there was no dispute regarding his involvement in those cases.
The trial court dismissed Dever’s slander claim, reasoning:
The statement that the Plaintiff had sued previous employers was deemed true by the court. The court also emphasized that a publication does not have to be entirely accurate to be protected, as long as it is substantially true.
Regarding Dugan’s statement about the possibility of the Plaintiff suing Comerchero or Dugan in the future, the court considered it as an opinion rather than a factual assertion, thus not constituting slander.
The court also refuted the Plaintiff’s claim that being labeled as “litigious” was defamatory, stating that it was an expression of opinion rather than a statement of fact.
The Vermont Supreme Court panel concurred with the trial court’s decision, specifically agreeing that calling someone “litigious” is subjective and falls under the realm of opinion.
For more details, refer to the full court opinion.
