Gast v. Brittain

Defendant's opinion in a letter that plaintiff was "immoral" and did not live his life according to the "ideals of Scouting" did not state or imply any defamatory facts about plaintiff that were capable of being proved false.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

We granted certiorari in this case to determine whether the Court of Appeals correctly held that a letter written by the defendant, Andrew Gast, could reasonably be interpreted to state or imply defamatory facts about the plaintiff, Doyle Brittain, Sr. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Gast and held that his letter could imply objective defamatory facts that are capable of being proved false.1 Because the letter does not constitute actionable libel, however, we reverse. Before sending the letter that became the basis of this suit, Gast was an Eagle Scout youth leader in the Boy Scout Troop run by Brittain and other adult leaders. During the course of that relationship, Gast became disillusioned with the Troop’s leadership. Gast submitted his resignation from the Troop by letter, which he sent to certain people involved in the Troop and the parents of the boy scouts. In the letter, Gast described the reasons for his resignation. In the only portions of the letter possibly relevant to Brittain, Gast claimed that Brittain was “immoral” and did not live his life according to the “ideals of Scouting.” Gast also asserted that Brittain had disputed whether anything wrong had occurred after Gast presented his grievances at a meeting of the Troop leadership.

Shortly after circulation of the letter, Brittain brought this action for libel. Gast, in his motion for summary judgment, argued that the only references in the letter to Brittain were expressions of non-actionable opinion. The trial court granted Gast’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that Gast’s opinions about Brittain did not constitute actionable libel. The Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that a question of fact existed as to whether Gast’s opinions implied defamatory facts about Brittain that were capable of being proved false. This Court granted certiorari.

Gast v. Brittain

Defendant's opinion in a letter that plaintiff was "immoral" and did not live his life according to the "ideals of Scouting" did not state or imply any defamatory facts about plaintiff that were capable of being proved false.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report