Libel Hypothetical

PART 1

What type of libel plaintiff is the court likely to make Simmons?
The court is likely to make Simmons a private citizen.

What, then, will be the requisite standard of fault in this case?
Simmons will only have to prove negligence, failure to exercise ordinary or reasonable care, in this case. 

Will Simmons be able to prove the requisite standard fault?
I believe Simmons has a chance to successfully prove negligence. The court will look at the number and credibility of the sources. As far as I can tell, the PuffHo interviewed three people: New York Police Sgt. Rocco T. Ruggiero; Robin Hubier, a bicyclist who happened to see the crash; and a Brooklyn College official.

Though the credibility of the police sergeant and college official is likely sound, the credibility of the bystander is easily questioned, and it’s concerning that she’s the only source directly quoted in the article. It doesn’t appear that the PuffHo reached out to Simmons or his lawyer for comment, and it is possible that the court would see PuffHo as failing to exercise good reporting practices, as some key facts are missing in the article, such as Simmons’ blood alcohol content and any charges against Simmons.

Because the PuffHo never directly accuses Simmons of drunk driving, I think it should worry more about the Hubier’s quote.

Are there other defenses PuffHo might consider?
I would suggest PuffHo consider a First Amendment opinion defense. This defense covers fair comment and opinion. Because it is impossible to prove whether Simmons is in fact stupid and the quote is only Hubier’s opinion, I believe the statement is protected from libel claims.

PART 2
In the second part of this assignment, rather than being published to PuffHo.com, the coverage is tweeted by a reporter at the scene, the police station and the hospital. Ruggiero now is suing for libel because of the reporter’s live tweets. How might your counsel change?
My counsel would change significantly if Ruggiero were the plaintiff. He would be considered an all-purpose public figure, and because of that, he would have to prove actual malice, showing a reckless disregard for the truth and/or knowledge of falsity. I do not think he could prove this fault standard in this case.

The PuffHo may also use the qualified privilege defense in this case, if the reporter was covering official government reports and meetings. Even if what Ruggiero said was false, the reporter is not responsible for the truth of falsity of what he says.