“‘Trade libel is defined as an intentional disparagement of the quality of property, which results in pecuniary damage to plaintiff. . . . “Injurious falsehood, or disparagement, then, may consist of the publication of matter derogatory to the plaintiff’s title to his property, or its quality, or to his business in general, . . . [The] plaintiff must prove in all cases that the publication has played a material and substantial part inducing others not to deal with him, and that as a result he has suffered special damages. . . . Usually, . . . the damages claimed have consisted of loss of prospective contracts with the plaintiff's customers.”’”
“A cause of action for trade libel thus requires (at a minimum):
(1) a publication;
(2) which induces others not to deal with plaintiff; and
(3) special damages.”
Nichols v. Great American Ins. Cos., 169 Cal. App. 3d 766, 773 (1985).
CALIFORNIA STATE COURTS
Supreme Court of California: None.
California 1st District: Hofmann Co. v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 202 Cal. App. 3d 390, 397 (1988).
California 2d District: Atlantic Mutual Ins. Co. v. J. Lamb, Inc., 100 Cal. App. 4th 1017, 1035 (2002).
California 3d District: Leonardini v. Shell Oil Co., 216 Cal. App. 3d 547, 572 (1989); Nichols v. Great Am. Ins. Cos., 169 Cal. App. 3d 766, 773 (1985).
California 4th District: City of Costa Mesa v. D’Alessio Investments, LLC, 214 Cal. App. 4th 358, 376 (2013); ComputerXpress, Inc. v. Jackson, 93 Cal. App. 4th 993, 1010 (2001).
California 5th District: None.
California 6th District: Barnes-Hind, Inc. v. Superior Court, 181 Cal. App. 3d 377, 381 (1986).
CALIFORNIA FEDERAL COURTS
United States Court of Appeal for the 9th Circuit: nSight, Inc. v. PeopleSoft, Inc., 296 Fed. Appx. 555, 560 (9th Cir. 2008); Microtec Research v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 40 F.3d 968, 972 (1994).
Central District: Rebel v. Aqua Connect, No. CV 13-4539 RSWL (MANx), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137937, at *9-10 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2013).
Eastern District: Passport Health, Inc. v. Travel Med, Inc., No. 2:09-CV-01753-GEB-JFM, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46210, at *13-14 (E.D. Cal. May 11, 2010).
Northern District: Siebert v. Gene Sec. Network, No. 11-cv-01987-JST, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149145, at *30-31 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 16, 2013).
Southern District: Visant Corp. v. Barrett, No. 13cv389 WQH (WVG), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95696, at *25 (S.D. Cal. July 9, 2013)