How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Allen M., Esq. Your Own Question
Allen M., Esq.
Allen M., Esq., Attorney
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 19312
Experience:  Lawyer and legal specialist.
Type Your Legal Question Here...
Allen M., Esq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

could the below be considered libelous or defamation if placed

This answer was rated:

could the below be considered libelous or defamation if placed on Google reviews or something like Yelp?

Blue Science is fighting the former field manager's unemployment claims, as if solely his performance (not their own, or even a combination) led to material company damage. So much so that he does not deserve unemployment. I can personally assure you that the GM Jonathon was well aware of where the Blue Science Houston branch stood for an extended period of time. I was there for phone conversations where he was informed by Tyler (then Field Manager), and Jonathon (the GM) would come into the office himself to work at times. It would not speak well of him as a General Manager in my opinion if after these conversations, and visits to the office he were still unaware as to the depth of issues facing the Houston Branch. If all of the failures (and business damages) up to the point of the position change ALL were on Tyler (to the extent that they are fighting his right to unemployment) then simply replacing him would solve all of the problems, right? Why would they also force him to uphold his non-compete clause, were he so totally inept as to have run the company into the ground to the extent that unemployment should be disputed? But they actually went to to implement many of the changes that were recommended by the former field manager in some form or another.

I cannot say that Blue Science had no legitimate reason to make a change at manager, I was not involved day to day, and refuse to tell someone how to run their business in that way. This is a business and I have no issue with their right to make hiring/firing decisions based upon any legal reason they so choose, but to battle over unemployment as if all of the issues are directly his fault comes off to me as cheap at best if not downright vindictive. I don't believe a business should be able to conveniently play dumb with regard to their rights and responsibilities for performance. Any issues Blue Science Houston was facing were open to be seen and understood by the GM, and that makes them just as culpable for the performance in my view.
Thank you for your question today, I look forward to assisting you. I bring nearly 20 years of legal experience in various disciplines.

I reviewing each of those statements, I see few statements of fact. I see a lot of statements of opinion.

It takes a statement of fact, which can shown to be false, for a defamation of character claim to be available.

Statements of fact that I see here:

1. Blue Science is attempting block unemployment. If that is true, no issue is presented.

2. Managers were aware of where the Houston branch stood. If true, that's fine.

3. The company is enforcing a non-compete. If true, that's fine.

The rest appears to be your opinion of facts, again, not the basis for a defamation of character claim.

I see no legal issue, provided that you know to be true the factual statements that you made.
Allen M., Esq. and 7 other Legal Specialists are ready to help you