How Do You Prove Libel and Slander?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 июл 2011
- Libel and slander are both types of defamation -- falsely conveying a very negative impression of another person or business. For example, if Lindsay says Joe is a convicted criminal, or is dishonest, or deals in stolen and defective merchandise, or spreads syphilis, that certainly could create a negative impression about Joe.
Check out the complete article: injury-law.freeadvice.com/inj...
Head over to our Libel/Slander/Defamation Law Forum if you have Defamation Law questions: forum.freeadvice.com/libel-sl...
Got a legal question or need an attorney? Visit AttorneyPages: attorneypages.com
More Resources:
FreeAdvice on Libel and Slander: injury-law.freeadvice.com/inj...
FreeAdvice on Personal Injury Law: injury-law.freeadvice.com/inj...
For more great videos, visit the FreeAdvice Law Channel: / freeadvicelaw
DISCLAIMER: This video contains general information prepared by the professional staff of FreeAdvice.com, is not legal advice, and is provided AS IS. To locate attorneys who provide clients with personal legal advice, visit AttorneyPages.com: attorneypages.com.
Jealousy is no joke. You work so hard to have a good name and all it takes is one false rumor to ruin it. For some of us our name and reputation is all we have left when everything else has been taken from us due to false allegations or misinformation..wtf.🤭🧐
I have been slandered by employees of a former employer and neighbors.
The problem with this is people are willing to believe everything they hear. They like to see others fall.
Can't we just go back to a good old fashioned sword/pistol dual? People would be much more careful about running their mouth.
No. Losing a duel doesn't make you wrong. This means that people who train to duel are automatically correct no matter what they say. If I was confident in my ability to win, I could slanderize anybody I wanted. This is why dueling and mutual combat is illegal in most of the US, it sets an odd precident for truth.
@Seaman Michel .. You missed this: The truth is legal. .. This concept of 'the truth is legal' should be applied to the new, so called "Hate Speech" .. The truth must always be legal, IMO. .. What do you think? ..
@Alice Brennan Make truth always legal as in the old libel and slander laws. Hate speech is a myth. ..
@Alice Brennan.. Austria shut down 4 - 7 mosques and expelled 40 - 70 imams for committing hate speech. .. Any country can declare that all Marxism is "Hate Speech," and they can do this any time they like. [Watch Brazil ] .. Any country can do anything they like: German made NAZIism *illegal* a long time ago. Saudi Arabia allows only muslims to be citizens. .. The US and Canada could declare that islam is *not* a religion. After all, some Buddhists say that Buddhism is not a religion and others say that it is. .. I am talking about the classification of paradigms, right? Think about that, and then look at what China is doing.
. BTW, I think you used the term "compelled speech" improperly. .. And, I'm Canadian.
So much truth, just let the lawyers run through their pockets after
My manager walks right up to me in front of everyone and says do you stare at girls. In a booming and loud voice so as to embarrass me I say no and my manager just says thank you. Days weeks months later I hear that my ethnic features scare little girls. Now I'm hearing my coworkers whom I don't work with directly are saying they are afraid of me. Now I see how even a question like that can harm a person's reputation directly. Now gossip is going out of control but my direct coworkers just say don't worry about it . It's not a big deal. It is only not a big deal when it isn't happening to you .
I think it should be the opposite. The one that did the slander should have to prove that their words are true and not the other way around.
Agreed
Yeah.
The one that makes the claim must justify it so you're wrong here.
It is both. True statements are protected. The person who did the "slander" also has to prove it isn't slander. That it is true.
@Shawn Conley Fukuda
Of course there is a time & a season for EVERY purpose under Heaven, but, usually, for the very most part, maybe always, more than likely always, more like I personally wouldn't judge some people for lying in some certain situations & depending on those, maybe it is called for, but outside of that indeed, the Truth is always best. (Maybe those gray mental fart areas don't require a Truth but instead a "none of your damn business or, else I'd have probably informed you already, now get the hell on somewhere, you bother me. Bye." . . . But, you know . . . in cases of court & all and the way judges are always big black robed babies when ya hit 'em with that one, & the lawyers sometimes too, just won't let that do for an answer, even if it should be so, because of all the other times I agree too, hell no, you owe the Truth & we made it our business & you already knew we would so spill it.
this video gives insight into why some people choose to take care of things themselves versus going legal. better chance of getting justice even despite the consequences. clearly the law is not on the victims side. in the end bullies are rewarded and protected by society and the law.
I am going through a conflict between a business owner for my true-to-fact review about my negative experience. This was a big help, thank you for sharing this!!
ok, what I got out of this is that slander is legal and can keep you from getting a job.
And that is why we get to sue people for that. The problem is proving it. I suppose we could force them to prove that it is true and win on that when they can't.
Very clear description of some very good and in many cases stress relieving information. In some cases where one ( most of us) has less legal information in their possession than an attorney at law, this kind of stuff is pure gold. But I can definitely see the benefits radiate out and save headaches all around in general.
Thank you so much for being so clear and for that I am a follower.
+octaviandogar76 Yes, agreed.
This guy is a fucking Gem. I love him, he's so informative and expressive. I'm enamored.
From what i can understand is. Disregards the statement. If it doesn’t caused harm, financial loss, affecting sales. But, personal feelings. It is not considered as defamation
Awesome absolutely fantastic very keep it up thanks for sharing wonderful review.
A lady who is a manager at a place I was working on under the table said I was fired cause of meth use even though there is no proof and also said the work we did was shoddy and started tearing down what we had built even though the building inspector looked at our work and said it looked good and we could finish drywalling the addition off. Both of these statements she made were false. Now her son is there doing the work. So I feel she trashed our reputation to the owner just to give the work to her son.
Yes!!!! Thank you!!!!
Dude this the description of the modern day rap game and social media
Excellent!
Is another way to say the statement in this video from the 0:50 - 0:58 (timing in seconds) "Opinions are treated like defamatory statements when there's some "accusatory implication" in the statement"?
Thank you for your advice. Now, if someone changes a statement that was innocuous to a statement that is false and damaging or defamatory, would that be grounds for a lawsuit? In other words, if they published some disconnected parts of the neutral statement to make it into a new callous, defamatory statement, is that proof of malice? if they knew the intend of the initial statement was different and non-offensive?
Sir i was just wondering if i AM allowed to arrest someone with The name Pam as an international security officer for slander or not at all?
Would an Eviction Notice based on unlawful reasons be considered libel? The landlord used a real eviction notice document to harass and intimidate a tenant, bullying on steroids, they broke so many laws, they re-programmed the buzzer so this tenant could not receive deliveries and/or visitors, they made serious accusations, and then said that another person would testify along with them that these were true statements, then the tenant discovered some real dirt on this supposed witness and then they asked another person to testify falsely, he refused and said this was sick and now he wants to move out. In the meantime, the building is supposedly a secure building by they de-activated the door, I imagine to cover for the fact that they messed with the tenant's buzzer but most people are not aware that the door is always unlocked, they still use their fobs to enter. What is wrong with people?
How does time effect the slander? Say, it was true at one point in the past, that was several years in the past, but is no longer true in the present and hasn’t been true for many years?
I have some of it on recording, and they literally tried to slander me right there in front of my face. Good thing I was recording.
GOOD INFO
I need your help. I have slander, defamation and liable. Easily provable and because of the same persons 4 days later because of her easily provable lies by the 8 cameras on that side of my house. She called the cops 4 days after the slander started (still to this day and it was last weekend) and they told me I need written consent to record on my porch 😂😂. I asked for reasonable articulate suspicion and he comes on my property, puts his hands on me and say “your being detained until you RESP...” almost said it but it’s super obvious on cause it was on camera. Then they say this is an official investigation so of course I ask “what crime” they rely “well” and “accusations”. Ok then accusations are accusations so what. Violated of my 1st, 3rd & 4th amendments and molested the safety of my own home to where I had to leave and stay elsewhere in fear of retaliation. Then they let the guy threatening to kill me who was solely there as a result of conspiracy to commit drive opposite a single lane one way around a blind turn in a construction zone- didn’t say word, no ticket absolutely nothing. They violated me in under 2 mins of showing up then stood with the 4 that obviously conspired because of what they said ON CAMERA and those 4 ppl have never been there together ever and 1 never even once. I think the cops were in on it because dude gave the cop a weird hand sign as he drove by to then circle back. Cop lied about hearing me be disorderly because I wasn’t yelling and as seen on camera.
I think I was totally set up and pretty sure I can prove it because of there actions and the fight words they were using among themselves.
I’m in a shit storm for literally nothing and the thing she even refers to was days ago and I was picking my nose in the driveway on camera again. They came out and confronted me and the slander hasn’t stopped since
This guy is awesome
Wonderful
Good video. I will be sueing RUclips for altering my comments to appear more "problematic" than they really are. This is my real name.
You can't. You agreed to the guidelines of RUclips.
A stranger in my neighborhood did this to me but because I don't know her name, I couldn't press charges. The police know who she is, they know her name, but they won't help me and there is nothing I can do. This is how sociopaths get away with what they do. The law and judicial system is a joke.
I am so sorry to hear that.
Hmm. Request a copy of a police report. Look up the address, ask her name ?
Good to know....
Does it have to be financial harm? What if it ended a relationship.
I have some jackasses saying things that are not true about me, for example that I am a drug dealer, or use drugs, an alcoholic or that my military veteran husband and I are pornstars, being video taped unlawfully without authorization then publishing on line, in home and outside home, harrassing past employers, harrassing my family members and friends....Telling my friends false allegations about me that are not true....These people are obviously not my friends, nor do I wish to become with them... NON of these allegations are true....Law suit is still in order......
It's called a targeted individual program
@@GT47179 Thank you!
@@justbrowsing8162 God saw it all...trust in him
Where there is smoke....there usually is fire....& Those who made the fire oftentimes feel they need to put the, blame on someone else....
So here's my concern. I complained to the city about conditiin in a shelter I was staying in, the director of this shelter told the city "they have been dealing with me since nov' 2017 and she believed I am mentally ill" the city dismissed my complaints based on the directors statement who has no knowledge of my mental state, has never spoken to me at all to assess my mental state. The city forwarded my this director response and I call her and called her out on her claim. She said she got this info from her shelter manager ( someone else that hasn't spoken to me before). During this conversation the director apologized and said that should not have been said and that she doesn't think i'm mentally ill. Is this libel?
I’m not a lawyer but from what I’ve learned about this subject, your situation may involve privilege. Privilege usually applies to employment scenarios but I could see it applying to similar situations, so the director may be able to make such statements bc she has the privilege to do so, or immunity from prosecution, unless it’s said with malice.
I could be totally wrong!
very useful . knew From Oct. 21, 2015 - had a genius do this to me . Now the lawyer is gonna make me a dragon . right on
thanks it will help in my exam if question come and it will h
elp me in future yup
Lol, this guy speaks exactly like Larry Geller. He was Elvis's hairdresser. You can find him on RUclips. Everyone has a twin 🤣🤣🤣
What if they accuse someone of being a predator
Definitely defamation of character
He is so funny! But serious. I like 👍his presentation
Somebody shot out my estranged husbands truck windows. He automatically assumes it was me. He put in sis social media pads that it was me. People on his page are making threats towards me. It’s not even in my character to do such a thing. It’s sucks.
This applies to the USA only. In the UK, for example, there is no requirement for the Claimant to prove anything. All they have to do is refute the comment. In the UK, it is for the Defendant to prove what they said was true.
How to react to easily proven slander/libel against a Judge who is cloaked in Judicial immunity other than writing a book proving the libel/slander?
um I get called a bunch of names that's false could I sue
It depends on the context, connotation, and implications of those names. For example, if a woman is called "wh0r3", then she could sue because many jurisdictions sanction the false imputation of lack of chastity.
By contrast, if someone is called "tomato head", in order to sue for defamation that person would need to prove that this is causing harm to him (or her) because people are thereby deterred from associating with him/her. Sometimes it also boils down as to whether the statement was a statement of fact or of opinion. Defamation is only about statements of fact. That being said, being called "tomato head" may constitute harassment. Thus, the person might still have a valid claim even if there is no defamation.
Check out my channel and www.OneClubOfJusticides.com
I have a question too. If I share a story on RUclips but don’t name specific names but rather who the person is, such as “my friend” my “father” that doesn’t exactly paint the person in the best light, can I still be sued?
You can be sued regardless of anything because there exist vexatious litigants. What matters is whether you would prevail in a defamation lawsuit. If your statements are true and you're able to prove them, you're likely to prevail in court. It doesn't matter whether you mention people's name. You'll see in my RUclips videos "Corrupted from Ed to Judge" that I give people's names, but there I am also presenting documents that prove my statements so that those crooks don't bother filing a lawsuit.
Now, let's assume that your story is false and defamatory. If your references, images or descriptions of the defamed people are sufficient to identify who those people are, then yes, they have a feasible claim of defamation for your publication. If you don't provide enough identifying information, then technically speaking nobody is being defamed and therefore nobody has a valid claim against you.
One Club of Justicides first off, thank you so much for answering my question. I really appreciate it. Well let’s just say I’m telling the story and it’s my opinion that the person I’m talking about is a psychopath. Is that still defamation? What if I add a disclosure to my video that says the content is all my opinion based on my perception of events? Can what I’m saying still be considered defamation?
Also, I assume saying “my brother” is more than enough identifying information but if I say, “a guy I’m related to,” and make up a fake name, leaves the possibility open that it’s not my brother?? If that makes sense
Defamation has to do with statements of fact. Although 'psycopath' has a terrible connotation, it is too generic and therefore unlikely to constitute statement of fact. The word 'psycopath' alone qualifies as statement of opinion, not of fact. By contrast, saying "John is a murderer" would be actionable (that is, it would lead to a valid claim of defamation) because 'murderer' implicitly refers to one or more instances of John's act of killing people.
The disclaimer that all of it is your opinion or your perception is a good starting point. In a recent decision, Competitive Enterprise Institute v. Mann, 150 A.3d 1213, 1241, 1245 (2016), the D.C. appellate court emphasizes the relevance of "employ[ing] language normally used to convey an opinion, such as 'in my view', or 'in my opinion' or 'I think' ". However, the matter may turn slippery: the US Supreme Court points out that "[It] would be destructive of the law of libel if a writer could escape liability for accusations of [defamatory conduct] simply by using, explicitly or implicitly, the words `I think.' ", Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1 (1990). (you can find these judicial opinions at sites like leagle.com ). It depends on what exactly you are publishing or how you end up portraying it.
Using ambiguities and/or giving a fake name helps, but what matters is (1) whether the information (be it words or images) leads to identifying a real, specific individual and, if so, (2) whether unflattering facts or statements are falsely attributed to that person.
One Club of Justicides thank you 🙏🏻 very much for this explanation along with siting a case that I can actually read about and understand. Also I looked for the video you mentioned in your last comment and a video came up but the man speaking it it wasn’t you. I don’t know if maybe I found the wrong one. Can you provide me with a link?
I really wish my attorney who’s representing me in the settlement of my mother’s estate provided me with such thorough explanations and as quickly as you have. Actually I wish I could go back in time and study law in college because I really do have an interest in it. Particularly in criminal law.
I watch a lot of these videos where people will be talking about an ex or someone who they believe to have a personality disorder (like the person I’m dealing with now) and they will talk about all of the horrible things they have done, and I wonder how it is that they aren’t being sued for defamation. The person or people rather, in whom I’d like to speak about, they are looking to screw me in any way possible and I’m sure they will not hesitate to sue me.
One Club of Justicides also basically when all is said and done, I cannot outright accuse anyone of anything unless I have proof to back up what I say. I assume the safest bet is to post anonymously and not use any names or specifically identifiable information. I’m just curious but how many of those cases are actually won and what are the damages? Also, do you know anything about emotional distress? What type of lawyer would you see if you wanted to sue someone for emotional distress?
What if, someone says you are saying something, but you aren't is that considered defamitory/slander.
Yes, if it is not true and it makes you look bad in someway. I don't see one good reason not to call it slander or libel depending upon how it is spread. Also repeating a slanderous statement can land someone in trouble. Also re-writing a libelous statement could be just as *_dangerous_*. The best thing is to just not repeat it in any way if you think it might be defamatory. Even if something is true but hurtful, there are people who don't like things out in the open especially if those things were not crimes anyhow. They can be very vindictive so don't gossip unless you are ready to deal with them. Some people will sue you even if it was all true because they might want to punish you and are hoping you can not prove it was true.
'It's not slander if it's true' ~ Tyrion Lannister
I just had a fake vet run my father's name down my father was a Viet man vet and is dieing of cancer right now I'm so pissed he made a scene at a .ca hospital just because he was mad they wouldn't let him in.
Do you answer questions?
In our FreeAdvice Forums at forum.FreeAdvice.com, consumers can pose questions and receive answers and suggestions from other consumers, experts and attorneys in 50 topics.
Our FreeAdvice 'Ask a Lawyer' service enables consumers to ask questions of lawyers, and receive answers from attorneys. www.freeadvice.com/ask.htm
Nosferatu
The Yug Life lmao. Totally.
Not libellous to say,those facial expressions and eye movements make him an excellent candidate for a Murnau's Nosferatu remake.
I mean that as a compliment,being a Dracula fan.
He could probably swing Gollum and the thing from "Descent" too.
Bigtime yew-face
Like what BRC and magnolia did
This dudes eyes are everywhere :D btw I know why
Payton Tamez why? I can't figure it out but it's funny to watch.
Sadie Geise Kernow I am pretty sure he is reading some kind of screen prompt. Most likely just too close to him lol
Payton Tamez not libel!!
Payton Tamez thought you would insinuate “C O C @ I
N E”. Lmfao
Lmao what
NONE OF THIS MATTERS UNLESS YOU HAVE MONEY! NO LAWYER WILL HELP A POOR PERSON!
A filed a complaint against B in a police station , that, B was cheated of
1 million rupees by giving false promises. But actually B didn't do that.
Can B sue against A in the court.
As defamation case
What if you don’t want money
You don't. They have to dispeove it.
What if you plan on doing a movie review and say something really negative about it, something that may have been the result of something behind the scenes?
If you're reviewing the movie, why would you write about what happened behind the scenes?
***** For trivia, and because something behind the scenes can affect the film's direction, some of which are very controversial
MrAtroncoso all they to say is "It's rumored" "It's Alleged" or something that unless their is evidence to prove other wise.
My question is when you prove this slander and liability why are the people not being charged for the criminal part of their slander? First of all I have not told any law officials that I did not know who did what in my cases. They wanted to be blamed for not completing a real investigation making themselves appear guilty on their own. I gave specific dates and names of everyone involved. I made it clear that the clerk, sheriff, judge, da, county attorney, city attorney, and fbi do not know me. How is that accusing them of anything besides the truth. Not completing a real investigation. Their own prejudices and biases makes them guilty and incompetent of working in the community. I gave the specific names of the family members who were involved. I made it clear that I HATE the other family members who keep trying to tell me not to do something to someone if they are family but let them keep doing stiff to me. Like keep lying. I am not going to do none of that. It is obvious these wicked people were trying to defame my character and make it appear because I have dealt with deaths just like their trifling behinds that somehow I am the only one who now cannot function but they can. That is very offensive especially since they are so damn weak and are easily to detect their dishonesty. All of this mess is an insult to my intelligence and should have been dealt with years ago. No judge, da, police, county attorney, city attorney, or fbi has any authority to disrespect me when I file a criminal report with an abundance of attached proof no matter how well they are all taught to lie. They are a disgrace to this country.
Truth statements are protected. But what if the truthful statement conveys information that is under a confidentiality agreement?
Example: Bill sexually abuses Tom. Tom sues Bill. Bill agrees to a settlement, with an agreement that Tom will never talk about the abuse or the settlement. Tom breaks the confidentiality agreement, and Bill sues Tom for libel. Can Tom still use the truth as a defense?
***** They wouldn't sue for libel, he'd sue to get his money back from the confidentiality agreement that Tom breached. But Bill shouldn't expect to get much sympathy of a jury, if it comes down to an impasse or what they see as exceptional circumstances then Bill is SOL.
Treblaine Thank you!
This guy posted a blog and he put a picture of me without my consent. He went on to say false statements and its in several blog websites. Do you think I can sue him?
Mary Depends on the jurisdiction and VERY specific details of the case. Only a qualified lawyer can possibly hope to give an inkling of an answer. Though brace yourself for disappointment, you may have to pay a lawyer only to be told any lawsuit would be hopeless as even very hurtful, misleading and one sided declarations can still be "fair comment".
Lawsuits are rarely quick unless you have a good enough lawyer who can quickly negotiate a settlement.
You may be able to find a lawyer who will work on contingency, or at least will give you a free or low-cost analysis of your chances, but don't expect to be able to put the world to rights.
People have been lying for as long as people have been people, and lawyers aren't going to stop that. The thing is most people know that people lie, because they've been lied to and lied about and told lies themselves.
Also consider the Barbara Streisand Effect.
A random blog by a pathalogical liar and deluded fantasist, almost no one cares about. But when the law starts trying to suppress their message, it is free advertising and a conniving hack can easily use it to give a false sense of legitimacy.
Because here's the thing: many more people think libel laws are used to suppress truthful but hurtful things than think non-name no-life bloggers have figured out the secrets to the universe. Hell, they haven't figured out how to move out from their mom's basement.
Lawyers won't advise you on that, they care about what the judge and 12 jurors think, they aren't measured by the overall effect.
I thank you so much for your helpful information. I truly appreciate it, so much. I'm just do devastated because my ex is a big youtuber. He keep posting videos about me and posting false allegations about me. Hes completly ruined my life. I deleted all my social media and number and he is still posting videos about me. He has created over a hundred blogs about me. His friends harassed me so much, that I had to change my phone number. He also has my address and Im scared it would be leaked online. I just want him to stop. But anyways, sorry to drag you into this. Thank you so much for your information!! I cant express to you how thankful I am ! It was very helpful !!! Thank you so much I truly appreciate it more than anything ever written!! Thank you, you are very educated and know your stuff! Thank you Trebaline
So its okay to slander and triangulate ur victims with no consequence. That's nice.
What about Slander that doesn't have a financial impact? Say a reporter takes a example of one persons poor or illegal behavior and reports this as a whole group or organization are 'these type of people' even though theys no known connection between the sample and the group
As a none earning group, they no financial benefit to be lost, but as a result of the slander the group receives alot of negative criticism, Hate and even threats
Reporters although often bias would almost always have proof they had done enough research, the hard part is proving the person didn't have a good reason to believe what they were saying and did it with malice. Say if they are your enemy or an opposing business then that is much easier.
Regarding What The's answer, just beware that "malice" in the sense of "ill will" is not the same as the "actual malice" that is required to be proved in a defamation lawsuit. Of course, "ill will" doesn't negate "actual malice". Ill will or anger might just be somewhat related to "actual malice" in that certain defamers are more inclined to make statements with "actual malice" about people they don't like. In defamation lawsuits, actual malice means the defamer made the statements despite knowing they were false or with no reason for "believing" that they are true.
As for your initial question, if that constitutes "defamation per se", there might be a valid claim of defamation. Defamation per se usually consists of false accusations of serious crimes, false imputations of dishonesty or of moral turpitude. Check out at www.OneClubOfJusticides.com my Application briefs in the Michigan Supreme Court, as I address both types of defamation with case law from various jurisdictions. Also in my RUclips series "Corrupted from Ed to Judge" I explain various legal concepts, many of them pertaining to defamation.
Slander and libel - ( slander&libel) - solution as neobehaviourlism.*
How do you prove extortion and fraud by an already convicted felon with a slew of victims?
Scout? Is that you?
Hmmm....... HOW EXPENSIVE????? INTERESTING.
Good luck Joe
Help
Call me a hacker again on OWL!!
Socrates 3 filters explained it all.
😊
*NOTE* - The truth is legal. .. This concept of 'the truth is legal' should be applied to the new, so called "Hate Speech" .. The truth must always be legal, IMO. .. What do you think? ..
I am trying to sue my brother for domestic violence but I attacked him first, what do I do? He did a powerful headlock on me by severely choking me and grabbing my head than he threw me on the ground, damaging my ribs. I threw a soda at him first but he just wen't too far. I now know to never use any form of physical violence on someone when arguing with anyone ever again. My friend told me that I should not sue him because the End Times are near. Jesus will punish him for me he said but I don't want Jesus to punish him I wan't to get back at him first. He has abused me my for 20 yrs. and I wan't him to pay. He has done chokeholds on me multiple times for talking back to him. He has attacked me in so many horrible ways to physically and verbally im just lucky that he did not try to attack me sexually. He's being nice to me now because he has his pills he's still controlling me but being nice about it. His niceness is not real it's fake. He has damaged so much of our stuff. I just can't stand him anymore.
If you're in the US, you might want to consider obtaining a restraining order (aka personal protection order). More important, you need to avoid having contact with him. Doing otherwise would defeat the purpose of this type of orders. Did you report him to the police? What he did might constitute a crime "with intent to do great bodily harm". As for your ribs, I think you might sue him to recover medical expenses but I am not knowledgeable on that field of US law.
It sounds like your brother is a psychopath and you need to stay as far away from him as possible.
We all go through that shit growing up. Just stay away when older. Bring legal into things doesn't usually make things better. It just makes them expensive. There's an old addage: both the parties in the court room are in dishonor because they failed to solve the matter between themselves as men - and have to bring in another party, the state, to solve it for them.
He can counter sue because you admitted you attacked him first smh
Good cause I don’t use lawyers
Or "Crazy" so no one believes you.
Answer: good luck proving it! Thank me later.
Like that hot 🔥 Sarah Palin trying to sue the NY times? 🙄🤔😒🤷😆❗
I don’t want to become rich, I just want my job back. 😔
I am so sorry to hear that!
Egghead
Slander is free speech.