This summary highlights recent Florida state appellate decisions and published federal court opinions relevant to insurance practitioners throughout Florida.
Lattimer v. Babcock
Fla. 5th DCA (2026) – Defamation / Summary Judgment / Fault Standard
Holding
Reversed. A factual dispute existed as to whether the defendant acted negligently or with reckless disregard for the truth. Repeating statements from another source, even a law enforcement officer, does not automatically defeat a defamation claim.
Discussion
This Florida appellate decision addresses the limits of liability in defamation claims at the summary judgment stage. The case arose from statements made by the defendant during a homeowners’ association meeting after the plaintiff was elected as a director. The defendant made allegations about the plaintiff that were described as serious and damaging.
During the litigation, the defendant’s explanation for the statements changed. He ultimately claimed that he was repeating information provided by an unnamed law enforcement officer. The defendant also acknowledged that he was unsure whether the statements were true or false.
The plaintiff filed a defamation action. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant. It concluded that the plaintiff could not establish the required level of fault, which includes knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth, because the statements were based on information allegedly received from law enforcement.
The Fifth District reversed. The court held that the record presented a factual dispute regarding whether the defendant acted negligently or with reckless disregard for the truth. The court emphasized that repeating a statement from another source does not automatically shield a speaker from liability. That principle applies even when the source is claimed to be a government official. Under these circumstances, the issue of fault should be decided by a jury rather than resolved as a matter of law.
Practical Implications
- Reliance on third-party statements, including those attributed to law enforcement, does not automatically eliminate defamation exposure.
- Summary judgment may be difficult to obtain where there is evidence the speaker questioned the truth of the statements.
- Claims involving reputational harm may present fact-intensive issues that increase litigation risk and complicate early resolution.
Our team is available to discuss the topics written here and ready to provide additional information contained in this article. Contact us for more information.
