Slander as a Cause of Action in Alabama

Slander is a branch of defamation that deals specifically with spoken words. In Alabama, the law recognizes slander as a cause of action when certain elements are met. These elements are derived from Alabama case law and provide a clear framework for evaluating whether a person can bring a successful lawsuit. Below, each element is explained in detail so that you can understand how slander operates under Alabama law.

A False and Defamatory Statement Concerning the Plaintiff

The first requirement is that the defendant made a false statement about the plaintiff. A statement is defamatory if it harms the plaintiff’s reputation, subjects the plaintiff to ridicule, or lowers the plaintiff in the eyes of others. Truth is an absolute defense, so if the statement is accurate, it cannot be the basis for a slander claim. Importantly, not every unflattering remark rises to the level of slander. The statement must have the potential to cause genuine damage to how the plaintiff is viewed in the community.

An Unprivileged Communication to a Third Party

The second element focuses on communication. For a statement to qualify as slander, it must be spoken to someone other than the plaintiff. Telling the plaintiff alone is not enough because slander requires reputational harm, which comes from others hearing the words. The law also recognizes that some communications are privileged, meaning they are protected from liability. For example, statements made during judicial proceedings may be privileged. If the communication is not privileged and is shared with a third party, this element is met.

Fault Amounting at Least to Negligence

The third element examines the defendant’s level of fault. In Alabama, a plaintiff must show that the defendant was at least negligent when making the false statement. Negligence means that the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care to ensure the truth of the statement before speaking it. In some cases, especially when the plaintiff is a public figure, a higher standard of fault may be required, such as proving that the defendant acted with actual malice. For private individuals, however, showing negligence is usually sufficient.

Actionability of the Statement or Proof of Special Harm

The final element looks at whether the statement is actionable on its own or whether the plaintiff must prove special harm. Certain statements are considered so damaging that they are actionable without proof of harm. These include false accusations of a crime, statements imputing a contagious disease, or remarks that directly injure a person’s profession. This is often called slander per se. Other types of statements, however, are not automatically actionable. In those situations, known as slander per quod, the plaintiff must prove special damages. Special damages refer to specific material losses, such as loss of employment, lost business opportunities, or other harms that can be measured in money.

Conclusion

Slander as a cause of action in Alabama is built on four core elements: a false and defamatory statement about the plaintiff, an unprivileged communication to a third party, fault amounting to at least negligence, and either inherent actionability or proof of special damages. Together, these requirements protect individuals from harmful falsehoods while balancing the right to free expression. By understanding these elements, both lawyers and members of the public can better evaluate when spoken words cross the line into legally actionable slander.

Find the Law

“The elements of a cause of action for defamation are: 1) a false and defamatory statement concerning the plaintiff; 2) an unprivileged communication of that statement to a third party; 3) fault amounting at least to negligence on the part of the defendant; and 4) either actionability of the statement irrespective of special harm or the existence of special harm caused by the publication of the statement.” Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Smitherman,  872 So. 2d 833 (2003).

“To establish a prima facie case of defamation, of which slander is a branch, ‘the plaintiff must show that the defendant was at least negligent . . . in publishing a false and defamatory statement to another concerning the plaintiff.’ Warren, 739 So.2d at 1132 (quoting Nelson v. Lapeyrouse Grain Corp., 534 So.2d 1085, 1091 (Ala. 1988)). Even when the statement is not actionable per se, as Casey conceded, a plaintiff may maintain ‘an action for slander [per quod] founded on oral malicious defamation subjecting the plaintiff to disgrace, ridicule, odium, or contempt’ if that plaintiff alleges and proves ‘special damages.’ Butler v. Town of Argo, 871 So.2d at 17 (quoting Ceravolo v. Brown, 364 So.2d 1155, 1157 (Ala. 1978), quoting in turn Marion v. Davis, 217 Ala. 16, 18, 114 So. 357, 359 (1927)). ‘Special damages are the material harms that are the intended result or natural consequence of the slanderous statement, and the general rule is that they are limited to ‘material loss capable of being measured in money.’ Butler, 871 So.2d at 18 (quoting Shook v. St. Bede Sch., 74 F.Supp.2d 1172, 1180 (M.D.Ala. 1999)) (internal citations omitted).” Casey v. McConnell, 975 So. 2d 384, 391 (Ala. Civ. App. 2007)