• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Services
  • Contact
  • Reviews

California Defamation Law Blog

  • Home
  • About
  • Blogs
  • Archive Page
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Services
  • Contact Us
  • (626) 793-8607
You are here: Home / Defamation / Are Statements About Future Events Defamatory?

Are Statements About Future Events Defamatory?

September 14, 2016 by Adrianos Facchetti 3 Comments

As I’ve written about before, there is a thin and often elusive line between what is actionable defamation and what is non-actionable opinion.

An example of a type of statement that often confounds lawyers is one that appears to be a false statement of fact, but is actually an opinion about a future event or outcome. These statements usually arise from predictions about the outcome of legal proceedings, e.g., “I’m certain that defendant will be convicted of burglary.” Predictions related to investments are also non-actionable , e.g., “investors in XYZ, Inc. will see no returns and will lose their entire investments.”

But such statements are not actionable because they constitute an opinion about a future event rather than an opinion that implies a false assertion of fact. These statements constitute predictions as to the occurrence of a future event, which is inherently incapable of being proven true or false at the time they were made. See Cochran v. NYP Holdings, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 1998) 58 F.Supp.2d 1113, 1124 (prediction about lawyer’s strategy held to be non-actionable opinion); see also South Middlesex Opportunity Council, Inc. v. Town of Framingham (D.Mass.2010) 752 F.Supp.2d 85, 120 (“Because Orr’s statement is unambiguously an expression of opinion about a future event, he cannot be held liable for defamation as to this statement.”).

In sum, statements about future events or predictions generally cannot be proven true or false. As a result, they are not actionable and thus cannot for the basis of a valid defamation claim.

Copyright: <a href=’https://www.123rf.com/profile_kran77′>kran77 / 123RF Stock Photo</a>

Buffer Share

Filed Under: Defamation, defamation law

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Ralph Carpenter says

    October 5, 2016 at 11:36 pm

    What about a wriiten threat to evict, that is posted in the office lobby in plain sight and view for any and all the public who walk in? A threat that is the result of my continued complaints of theft and vandalism of my property. This is at a puplic storage facility, in my home town, in the neighborhood where I grew up.

    Reply
  2. Jon says

    May 8, 2017 at 11:42 pm

    Hi Adrianos, just testing this out.

    Reply
  3. peter says

    September 28, 2017 at 9:48 am

    very informative

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Ralph Carpenter Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

Some Featured

How to determine which costs are allowable in connection with an anti-SLAPP motion

Should a court consider a plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in determining how much to award in fees for the defendant following a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

May a trial court consider a defendant’s “walk away” offer when determining the reasonableness of fees following a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

Recent Posts

Does a claim for intentional physical distress exist under California law?

Does California’s anti-SLAPP statute apply in bankruptcy court?

Must attorney-client confidences be revealed in order to obtain attorney’s fees after a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

Follow Us On

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Search

Footer

California Defamation Law Blog

Law Offices of Adrianos Facchetti 4444 W. Riverside Drive, Suite 308, Burbank, CA 91505
California Defamation Lawyer & Attorney of Adrianos Facchetti Law Firm, offering services related to libel, internet defamation, slander, defamation of character, disparagement, anti-SLAPP, personal injury, car accidents, motorcycle accidents, trucking accidents, serving Los Angeles, San Fernando Valley, San Gabriel Valley, Pasadena, Burbank, Glendale, Arcadia, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Long Beach, Orange County, Ventura County, San Bernardino, and throughout California.

Recent Posts

  • How to determine which costs are allowable in connection with an anti-SLAPP motion July 18, 2022
  • Should a court consider a plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in determining how much to award in fees for the defendant following a successful anti-SLAPP motion? June 28, 2022
  • May a trial court consider a defendant’s “walk away” offer when determining the reasonableness of fees following a successful anti-SLAPP motion? June 24, 2022
  • Does a claim for intentional physical distress exist under California law? June 20, 2022

Copyright © 2025 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in