Defamation per se damages may be the only remedy a plaintiff can bring after a defamatory statement has harmed his reputation or career. While these damages are not always the most significant, they are important to remember in proving a defamation lawsuit. The damage to the reputation can be substantial, but not enough to support a defamation lawsuit. The Alaska Supreme Court ruled against a man who made defamatory statements about his father. The Alaska Supreme Court held that the man did not have to prove emotional pain or damage to his reputation in order to win his defamation case.

Defamation per se damages are based on four general categories of untrue statements. The statement must have caused the plaintiff actual damage, or special damages. These damages include loss of business, customer loyalty, or financial harm, and any other damaging statement about the plaintiff's profession or reputation. A plaintiff must demonstrate actual harm in order to win a case, and this can often be done through the use of experts and consultants.

Defamation per se claims usually involve four categories of damages. Damages awarded in these cases are special and consequential, and the trier of fact awards them based on the specific nature of the defamation. A general damage award compensates for reputational harm and emotional distress, and special damages are intended to punish the malicious behavior of a defendant. Defamation per se damages, however, are not automatic - they must be proven by a plaintiff.

While a plaintiff must demonstrate actual harm to demonstrate that the defamation was intended to damage the defendant's reputation, punitive damages may be awarded in defamation per se cases. However, punitive damages may be awarded when there is clear and convincing evidence that the respondent acted with reckless disregard for the high probability of harm. Minnesota statutes detail the factors that may be considered when determining punitive damages.

To succeed in a lawsuit for defamation per se, the plaintiff must show actual malice. To overcome the qualified privilege, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with actual malice. The plaintiff must also establish that the statement was made with proper reason. In addition, the plaintiff must show that the statement could not be construed as conveying facts. Defamation per se damages may include blanket denials of wrongdoing.

In order to prove that someone acted maliciously, the plaintiff must show that the defamatory statement was intended to hurt the public's reputation. Libel is actionable even if the speaker intended no harm or intended to make the person look bad. In defamation per se damages, the plaintiff must prove that the statement was intended maliciously. Otherwise, he may be able to argue that the defendant did so in good faith.

Indiana law recognizes that defamation occurs when a false statement is made about a person. Such a statement may be made by an individual, a business, or even a politician. Defamation law recognizes the importance of the reputation of an individual or business. It should be considered in all defamation cases to ensure the integrity of the legal system. For example, in defamation per se damages, the plaintiff can ask for money damages as well as a claim for pain and suffering.