HALE, JTR.
Jeffrey Glover, one of three defendants in an action for defamation, brings this motion for summary judgment against the plaintiff. The plaintiff, a stepmother, has brought an action of defamation against each of three stepchildren. In each case the action is based upon an email sent by the child to a real estate agent regarding a piece of property jointly owned by them and their father.
The second count of the complaint alleges defamation by Jeffrey. In paragraph six thereof the plaintiff states "on or about August 29, 2008, the defendant, Jeffrey Glover, sent an email to Katie French in which he made certain statements about the plaintiff, Lynzy Glover, with the express intent that she discussed unfair and untrue characterizations regarding Lynzy Glover with other Coldwell Banker colleagues in the Farmington Valley. Jeffrey Glover's statements, in pertinent part, were that in the past he and his siblings had experienced some difficulty with Lynzy trying to garner their signatures unbeknownst to them for a property transfer."
Jeffrey Glover files this motion on the ground that there is no evidence that Jeffrey Glover authorized any defamatory statement and that the plaintiff cannot prove that she sustained any damages."
The email sent by Jeffrey Glover states as follows:
"I agree with Robin.
CT Page 13870 Until you hear from me otherwise, I am not authorizing the sale of my interest in the property on Hartford Road in Simsbury with town assessor's, assigned account numbers, 30766785 and 30766790."
Section 17-49 of the practice book regarding summary judgments provides: "The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, affidavits and any other proof submitted show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." The party seeking summary judgment has the burden of showing the non-existence of any material fact. Connell v. Colwell, 214 Conn. 242, 246 (1990). Conversely, the party opposing such a motion must proffer "an evidentiary foundation to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact." Mytych v. May Department Stores, Co., 260 Conn. 152, 164 (2002).
In support of the motion for summary judgment the defendant has filed an affidavit and Exhibit A, containing portions of a deposition of the plaintiff, and Exhibit B, containing portions of a deposition by Jeffrey.
The plaintiff has filed an objection to the defendant's motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff's basic argument is that she adopts the entire December 2, 2010 objection to co-defendant, Robin Dirats' motion for summary judgment which motion was denied by the Court from the bench at an earlier hearing held on December 13, 2010.
The only similarity between the emails sent by Jeffrey's sister and brother and Jeffrey is in the language of the last paragraph of each email.
To establish a prima facie case of defamation, the plaintiff must demonstrate that 1) the defendant published a defamatory statement; 2) the defamatory statement identified the plaintiff to a third person; 3) the defamatory statement was published to a third person and 4) the plaintiff's reputation suffered injury as a result of the statement. Hopkins v. O'Connor 282 Conn. 821, 838 (2007). A defamatory statement is defined as a communication that tends to harm the reputation of another as to lower him of the estimation of the community or to deter third persons from associating or dealing with him. Hopkins v. O'Connor, 282 Conn. 821, 838 (2007).
In order to prevail on his defamation claim the plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with actual malice. Chadha v. Charlotte Hungerford Hospital, 97 Conn.App. 527, 537-38 (2006). CT Page 13871
In the opinion of this Court the plaintiff has failed to establish a claim for defamation. The plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the existence of a defamatory statement identifying the plaintiff to a third person that caused harm to her reputation. Nothing in Jeffrey's statement could be considered defamatory and there was certainly no harm suffered by the plaintiff. Jeffrey's email was self-contained. It was not dependent upon any other material and delivered a simple statement to the real estate agent. To anybody reading this email, it contains a simple statement to the effect that the author agrees with his sister, that the property should not be sold. The email did not identify the plaintiff, therefore the plaintiff's reputation was not harmed.
The motion for summary judgment is granted and judgment may enter for the defendant as to the allegation of defamation in the second count.
CT Page 13872