Question

FACTS: In a custody battle over a child named Laura Kennedy, the child's father and grandmother took her to the Lake of the Ozarks and notified the mother, Andrea, that they were keeping her for the weekend. They did not disclose their whereabouts and said they were keeping Laura with them until after a custody hearing scheduled for the following Tuesday. Andrea was angry about this and reported Laura as a missing child to the police department. On Sunday, she and her family placed up to 100 missing child posters around the area. These posters contained a picture of the grandmother, Ms. Kennedy, and Laura and said: "Last seen 1:30 p.m. on 8/30 leaving her home with paternal grandmother, Carol Kennedy, in a white Honda Prelude, no visible license plate, now with father and grandmother at unknown location."

One of the posters made its way into the Missing Children's Network display case in the local Wal-Mart. The Missing Children's Network is a partnership program between Wal-Mart and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). To protect against inaccurate information, Wal-Mart's policy is to display only those posters provided by the NCMEC and to keep the display case locked. Should an unauthorized poster be placed in the display, it is Wal-Mart's policy that the poster be taken down immediately. Wal-Mart headquarters mandated that its associates are expected to maintain the display cases and keep the displays updated. However, the unauthorized poster created by Andrea was not immediately removed from the Wal-Mart display. At least three different people contacted Wal-Mart managers regarding the poster, beginning on the Sunday of Labor Day weekend. Even if the poster was initially true, there was also evidence that the poster remained in the display case for up to 10 days after Laura was returned to Andrea and ceased to be missing.

Somewhere between 4000 and 6000 people each day walked past the display case with Ms. Kennedy's picture in it. As a result of the poster, Ms. Kennedy testified that she felt "embarrassed, shocked, and mad." She did not personally see the poster while it was on display, but she testified that several people told her that they saw the poster, though she did not remember precisely how many people, nor could she identify anyone. There was evidence that Ms. Kennedy visited a psychologist a couple of years after the incident. She complained of the damage to her reputation resulting from the poster displayed at Wal-Mart.

Missouri case law says that in order to prove defamation, a plaintiff must show actual damages. To demonstrate actual damages from defamation, a plaintiff must show that defamatory statements caused a quantifiable professional or personal injury, such as interference with job performance, psychological or emotional distress, or depression.

You are a juror in the case of Kennedy v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. You have considered the above evidence with your fellow jurors. Do you believe that Carol Kennedy has met her burden of proof in this case? Why or why not?

Answer 1

According to my opinion, Carol Kennedy has met her burden of proof. Even though Laura returned to her mother, Andrea did not take down the posters which led to people passing negative comments about her (which she has not heard directly). Mostly, in a custody battle, the custody is given to the mother until and unless it is proved that she is unfit to raise her child. So naturally, the public would empathize with that and speak ill of the other party. Having assumed that, this incident had a negative impact on her mental health for years and so she even had to visit a psychologist(supported by evidence).