This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

In December 2014, P publicly accused D of forcibly raping her some 40 years earlier. D’s attorney responded on his behalf by writing and leaking a defamatory letter. According to P, the letter deliberately distorts her personal background to “damage her reputation for truthfulness and honesty, and further to embarrass, harass, humiliate, intimidate, and shame” her. P alleges that excerpts of the letter were disseminated via the Internet and published by news outlets around the world. P filed suit in federal court for defamation under state law, but her case was dismissed. P appealed. The Court of Appeals concluded that, by disclosing her accusations to a reporter, P had “‘thrust’ herself to the ‘forefront’” of the public controversy over “sexual assault allegations implicating D” and was therefore a “limited purpose public figure.” Public figures are barred from recovering damages for defamation unless they can show that the statement at issue was made with “‘actual malice’-that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.” P was unable to make that showing.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.