Defamation by Implication a No-Go, Says Wash. Appeals Court

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

In  Warren Yeakey v. Hearst Communications, Inc. et al. (Case No. 39263-1-II), the Washington Court of Appeals this month rejected a plaintiff's claim of defamation by implication, holding that the media defendant did not create a false impression by omitting material facts from its substantially true reporting about the plaintiff's criminal history of drug abuse.

The now-defunct Seattle Post-Intelligencer reported on a tragic accident in November 2006, in which a construction crane operated by Yeakey collapsed, killing a tenant in a nearby apartment building. A series of P-I stories about the incident included the following headlines: "Operator in crane wreck has history of drug abuse" and "Man completed mandated rehab program after his last arrest in 2000," and noted in one story that Yeakey had a criminal record of at least six drug-related convictions.

A state probe concluded that the accident was caused by a structural defect, not an operator error, which the P-I reported.  Exonerated, Yeakey then sued for defamation, false light invasion of privacy, outrageous conduct, and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Though conceding the P-I stories did not contain any false statements about him, the plaintiff alleged defamation by implication, asserting the newspaper's juxtaposition of true statements created the false impression that he was to blame for the tenant's death.

Writing for the court, Judge Lisa Worswick ruled "a plaintiff may not base a defamation claim on the negative implication of true statements."

Wash. Appeals Court to Review 'Accurate' Libel Case

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals in Washington is expected to review the merits of a defamation action brought by crane operator Warren Yeakey against the Seattle Post-Intelligencer following an 11-page order by Eric Schmidt, commissioner of Division II of the appellate court, citing an "obvious error" by the trial judge.

Yeakey sued the Post-Intelligencer in November 2008, based on a series of front-page articles involving a fatal construction site accident in which Yeakey was the operator of the crane that collapsed and killed a man. One of the articles at issue reported Yeakey's prior convictions for drug-related crimes. Although the reporting on the convictions was accurate, the defamation complaint alleges that the Post-Intelligencer thereby implied that Yeakey was responsible for the construction site accident.

Attorneys for Hearst Communications, Inc., the Post-Intelligencer's owner, twice were unsuccessful in their efforts to get the trial court to throw out the libel claim, arguing that the truthfulness of the articles was an absolute defense.

Commissioner Schmidt was more sympathetic in his Order, writing that "The law in Washington does not recognize a claim for defamation by implication based on a juxtaposition of true statements. No set of facts exists that entitles Yeakey to relief."

The order merely found the trial judge's denial of the defendant's motion to dismiss erroneous, but does not dismiss Yeakey's claim. Meanwhile, the Post-Intelligencer stopped printing a paper version earlier this year and is now available online only.