Editing Defamation (section)

====Defamation per se====
Many common law jurisdictions recognise that some categories of statements are considered to be defamatory ''per se'', such that people making a defamation claim for these statements do not need to prove that the statement was defamatory.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dancingwithlawyers.com/freeinfo/libel-slander-per-se.shtml |title=Dancing With Lawyers |publisher=Dancing With Lawyers |access-date=7 September 2010}}</ref> In an action for defamation ''[[Illegal per se|per se]]'', the law recognises that certain false statements are so damaging that they create a presumption of injury to the plaintiff's reputation, allowing a defamation case to proceed to verdict with no actual proof of damages. Although laws vary by state, and not all jurisdictions recognise defamation ''per se'', there are four general categories of false statement that typically support a ''per se'' action:<ref name="defperse"/>
# accusing someone of a crime;
# alleging that someone has a foul or loathsome disease;
# adversely reflecting on a person's fitness to conduct their business or trade; and
# imputing serious sexual misconduct.
If the plaintiff proves that such a statement was made and was false, to recover damages the plaintiff need only prove that someone had made the statement to any third party. No proof of special damages is required. However, to recover full compensation a plaintiff should be prepared to prove actual damages.<ref name="defperse"/>
As with any defamation case, truth remains an absolute defence to defamation ''per se''. This means that even if the statement would be considered defamatory ''per se'' if false, if the defendant establishes that it is in fact true, an action for defamation ''per se'' cannot survive.<ref>{{cite web|title=Defamation|url=http://www.dmlp.org/book/export/html/1813|website=Digital Media Law Project|access-date=31 October 2017}}</ref> The conception of what type of allegation may support an action for defamation per se can evolve with public policy. For example, in May 2012 an appeals court in New York, citing changes in public policy with regard to [[homosexuality]], ruled that describing someone as [[gay]] is not defamation.<ref name=NYGayRuling>{{cite news|title=Label of Gay Is No Longer Defamatory, Court Rules|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/nyregion/court-rules-calling-someone-gay-is-not-defamatory.html|access-date=3 June 2012|newspaper=The New York Times|date=31 May 2012|agency=Associated Press}}</ref>