Is a board member a public figure for purposes of defamation?

Occasionally, I am asked whether comments made by individuals during the course of a proxy fight, election or removal effort can be the basis of a defamation claim. Even under the best of circumstances, courts have difficulty with the concept of defamation. They try to balance the interests of innocent people to be free of lies that might tarnish their reputations against the free speech rights of people making the allegedly defamatory statements. This balancing act becomes even more difficult when statements are made in the context of an election or removal. Whether based in law or not, courts have an underlying belief that elections should be decided by the voters after each side has had an opportunity to present their case.

The Wyoming Supreme Court recently addressed this issue in the context of a community association. In Martin v. Committee for Honesty and Justice at Star Valley Ranch, a board member filed a defamation action against a committee of homeowners who were criticizing the board member's role in the resignation of the general manager. The Wyoming Supreme Court ruled against him. “The dispute at issue here was, at its essence, a political one,” the court concluded in a unanimous decision. The governing board in a homeowners’ association serves as the equivalent of a city council in a community, the court said, and members of the association should have the same right as residents of a community to criticize their elected officials. The Court then ruled that the board member was a limited public figure. Under defamation law, it is necessary to prove actual malice in addition to a false statement when the plaintiff is a public figure.

A California Court of appeals, however, reached the opposite conclusion. In Lee v. Ford, a homeowner, accused a board member of stealing from the association, receiving kickbacks from contractors, and a variety of other improper and illegal acts, all of which were proven to be false. The board member filed suit for defamation and won an award of $5,000.00. The California court ruled that the board member was not a public figure saying, the homeowner “cannot bootstrap her private anger at [the board member] into a public controversy by vilifying [him] with false accusations.”