📋 Overview

You've received a demand letter accusing you of defamation, libel, or slander. Before you panic, know that California has strong protections for speech, including the nation's most robust anti-SLAPP statute. Many defamation claims fail because the plaintiff cannot prove all required elements.

Truth is Absolute Defense

If your statement is substantially true, you cannot be liable for defamation regardless of how harmful it was.

Opinion is Protected

Pure opinions that cannot be proven true or false are constitutionally protected under the First Amendment.

Anti-SLAPP Protection

California's anti-SLAPP law can get frivolous suits dismissed early with your attorney fees paid by the plaintiff.

Elements Plaintiff Must Prove

  • Publication - Statement communicated to at least one third party
  • False statement of fact - Not opinion or substantially true
  • About the plaintiff - Identified or reasonably identifiable
  • Unprivileged - Not protected by absolute or qualified privilege
  • Fault - Negligence for private figures; actual malice for public figures
  • Damages - Harm to reputation (presumed for libel per se)
$450
Attorney Response on Letterhead

Case review, professional response letter, anti-SLAPP analysis. Often deters frivolous claims.

Schedule Review

🔍 Evaluate the Claim

Carefully analyze the demand letter to identify weaknesses in the plaintiff's potential case.

Claim Assessment Matrix

Statement Type Defense Strength Your Risk
Verifiably true statement Absolute defense LOW
Pure opinion ("I think...") Constitutional protection LOW
Review of services received Fair comment + anti-SLAPP LOW
Accusation without evidence Depends on context MEDIUM
False statement of fact Limited defenses HIGH

📄 Statement Analysis

  • ✓ Identify exact words at issue
  • ✓ Determine if fact or opinion
  • ✓ Gather evidence of truth
  • ✓ Note context of publication

📝 Plaintiff Analysis

  • ✓ Public or private figure?
  • ✓ Actual damages claimed?
  • ✓ Prior reputation issues?
  • ✓ When did they learn of statement?

Statute of Limitations

California has a 1-year statute of limitations for defamation (CCP 340(c)). The clock starts when the statement is first published. If the demand letter references statements made more than a year ago, the claim may be time-barred.

🛡 Your Defenses

California law provides robust defenses against defamation claims. Here are your primary options.

Truth (Substantial Truth)

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. The statement need only be "substantially true" - minor inaccuracies that don't change the overall meaning don't matter. The burden is on you to prove truth.

When to use: You can document that your statement is accurate or essentially accurate.

Opinion / Fair Comment

Statements that are clearly opinion rather than assertions of fact are protected. Context matters - statements on review sites, blogs, or social media are often understood as opinion. Use of "I think," "in my opinion," or hyperbole supports this defense.

When to use: Your statement reflects personal judgment, evaluation, or cannot be proven true or false.

Anti-SLAPP Motion (CCP 425.16)

California's anti-SLAPP statute allows early dismissal of lawsuits targeting speech on matters of public interest. If successful, the plaintiff must pay your attorney fees. File within 60 days of being served with the complaint.

When to use: Speech involved public issue, consumer review, government matter, or any issue of public concern.

Privilege - Absolute

Certain statements are absolutely privileged: statements in judicial proceedings, legislative proceedings, official government proceedings, or between spouses. Cannot be overcome even with malice.

When to use: Statement was made in court, to police, to legislators, or in other official proceedings.

Privilege - Qualified (Common Interest)

Qualified privilege protects statements made in good faith on subjects of mutual interest - such as employer references, complaints to authorities, or communications within organizations. Can be defeated by malice.

When to use: Statement made to someone with a legitimate interest in receiving the information.

Public vs. Private Figures

If the plaintiff is a public figure or limited-purpose public figure, they must prove you acted with "actual malice" - knowing falsity or reckless disregard for truth. This is a very high bar. Private figures need only prove negligence.

⚖ Response Options

Choose your response strategy based on the strength of your defenses.

Assert Defenses Firmly

If you have strong defenses (truth, opinion, anti-SLAPP), respond firmly asserting your position. Warn of anti-SLAPP fee-shifting if they file a frivolous suit.

  • Shows you won't be intimidated
  • Puts plaintiff on notice of fee risk
  • May deter lawsuit entirely

Ignore the Letter

If the claim is clearly meritless, you may choose not to respond. Many demand letters are never followed by lawsuits. However, document your analysis.

  • No cost, no engagement
  • Doesn't validate their claim
  • Risk of being sued anyway

Limited Retraction

If some statements were inaccurate, consider a limited retraction of only the false parts. Under Civil Code 48a, retraction can limit damages for libel.

  • Caps damages exposure
  • Shows good faith
  • Partial admission risk

Negotiate Removal

If the statement has minimal value to you, negotiate removal in exchange for a release of claims. Get a broad release covering past and future claims.

  • Quick resolution
  • No litigation costs
  • May feel like surrender

Anti-SLAPP: Your Secret Weapon

If plaintiff files suit, anti-SLAPP can flip the economics

Filing anti-SLAPP motion $5,000-15,000
Discovery stayed during motion Saves $10,000+
If you win: case dismissed $0 further costs
Mandatory fee award to you $15,000-50,000+
NET RESULT IF ANTI-SLAPP WINS Fees Recovered

📝 Sample Responses

Customize these templates for your situation. These are starting points - consider attorney review for high-stakes situations.

Truth Defense Response
I have received your letter dated [DATE] regarding statements I made about [PLAINTIFF]. After careful review, I decline your demand to retract or remove these statements. The statements at issue are true and accurate. Specifically: [Statement 1] is supported by [evidence - documents, witnesses, records]. [Statement 2] is documented by [evidence]. Truth is an absolute defense to defamation under California law. I will vigorously defend any lawsuit and will seek recovery of my attorney fees under California's anti-SLAPP statute (CCP 425.16), which applies to speech on matters of public concern. Should you file a meritless lawsuit, I will pursue all available remedies including fee-shifting.
Opinion Defense Response
I am in receipt of your demand letter dated [DATE]. The statements you reference are expressions of my personal opinion based on my direct experience, and are protected speech under both the First Amendment and California Constitution. My statements were clearly framed as opinion: [quote showing opinion language - "I believe," "in my experience," etc.]. They appeared in a context where readers understand statements as opinion [review site, social media, etc.]. Opinions cannot form the basis of a defamation claim. See Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co. (1990); Gallagher v. Connell (2004). Your demand has no legal merit. Be advised that California's anti-SLAPP statute provides for mandatory attorney fee awards against plaintiffs who file meritless defamation suits targeting protected speech. I will not hesitate to seek such an award if you choose to pursue this matter.
Anti-SLAPP Warning Response
Your demand letter of [DATE] threatens a defamation lawsuit over statements concerning [topic]. I want to ensure you understand the significant risks of pursuing such litigation in California. My statements concern a matter of public interest and are protected under California's anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. If you file suit, I will immediately file an anti-SLAPP motion, which will: 1. Stay all discovery, preventing you from conducting depositions or document requests; 2. Require early dismissal unless you can show probability of prevailing on the merits; 3. Mandate an award of my attorney fees against you if the motion succeeds. Anti-SLAPP fee awards in defamation cases routinely range from $25,000 to $100,000 or more. Given the clear defenses available to me, I strongly encourage you to reconsider before incurring this liability.

🚀 Next Steps

After evaluating your position, take these steps.

Step 1: Preserve Evidence

Save all evidence supporting your statements - documents, photos, communications, witnesses. Also preserve the context where you made the statement.

Step 2: Research Plaintiff

Determine if plaintiff is a public figure. Search for prior lawsuits - serial plaintiffs may have a pattern of threatening speakers.

Step 3: Draft Response

Using the templates above, craft a response that fits your situation. Consider attorney review for letters involving significant potential liability.

Step 4: Monitor for Lawsuit

Watch for a summons. If sued, remember the 60-day deadline for anti-SLAPP motions. Contact an attorney immediately if served.

If They File a Lawsuit

  • Don't default - You have 30 days to respond to the complaint
  • Consider anti-SLAPP immediately - 60-day deadline from service, stays discovery
  • Evaluate insurance - Homeowners or umbrella policies may cover defamation defense
  • Document their damages claim - Many plaintiffs cannot prove actual damages

Get Professional Help

Defamation claims can be complex. Get an attorney response that protects your rights and warns of anti-SLAPP consequences.

Schedule Consultation - $450

California Legal Resources

  • Civil Code 44-48: California defamation statutes
  • CCP 425.16: Anti-SLAPP statute full text
  • Civil Code 48a: Retraction statute for newspapers/broadcasts
  • First Amendment / Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 2: Free speech protections