Tuite v. Corbitt

Summary

The Illinois Supreme Court considered whether statements in the book Double Deal were actionable as defamation per se and false light invasion of privacy. The court declined to abandon Illinois’s innocent construction rule but held that the lower courts improperly applied it in dismissing Tuite’s claims. The court reversed the appellate and circuit court judgments and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. The Illinois Supreme Court declined to abandon the innocent construction rule. The rule remains applicable to defamation per se claims because a statement falling within a per se category is not actionable if it is reasonably capable of an innocent construction.
2. The statements were not reasonably capable of an innocent construction. Read in the context of the book's pervasive focus on organized crime and corruption, they would most likely be understood as implying that Tuite accepted illegally obtained money and was expected to use bribery or payoffs to secure acquittals.
3. The dismissal of the false light invasion of privacy claim was also reversed because it was based on the allegedly defamatory per se nature of the statements, and the defamation per se dismissal was erroneous.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Illinois should abandon the innocent construction rule for defamation per se claims.
2. Whether the challenged statements, read in the context of Double Deal as a whole, were reasonably capable of an innocent construction.
3. Whether reversal of the dismissal of the defamation per se claim required reversal of the dismissal of the false light invasion of privacy claim.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded