Court rules in KRQE defamation case
Appeals court says city hearing officer is a public official
The state Court of Appeals this week found that the former city hearing officer who sued KRQETV over a Larry Barker story is a public official, which will make her defamation claim harder to prove.
The decision means that Anita
Reina must prove that
Barker acted with “actual malice” when he broadcast a 2012 story that she says was defamatory.
KRQE attorney Marty Esquivel said the decision also offers a road map to judges tasked with determining who is and is not a public official.
“I think it’s a very important victory for journalists in New Mexico,” Esquivel said.
Esquivel wrote in court documents that the actual malice standard “substantially decreases the likelihood of recovery for defamation.” And it means the plaintiff must show proof of actual injury to reputation.
“It’s very difficult because you’ve got to prove that you knew it was a lie ... when you published it and you did it intentionally,” Reina’s attorney Stephen Lawless said.
While a private citizen is only required to prove that a person acted negligently in publishing a defamatory story, a public official has to show that a defendant acted with “actual malice” or with a “reckless disregard of the truth and with knowledge of falsity,” the Court of Appeals wrote.
Judges wrote that courts considering whether a person is a public official should ask if he or she has substantial responsibility for or control over the conduct of governmental affairs.
Barker’s story looked into Reina’s simultaneous work as a city hearing officer and a tribal court judge, an arrangement that she says had been approved by her supervisor. According to a transcript of his story attached to a motion in the case, Barker reported that his investigation showed Reina had been “quietly bilking the city of Albuquerque out of thousands of dollars by failing to take leave from her Albuquerque job to work at San Felipe Pueblo.”
Reina said in her lawsuit that the allegations were false. According to the Court of Appeals, Barker’s reporting triggered a formal city investigation, which found that Reina “possibly defrauded the city by working at times as a tribal judge” during the work day.
In a September order, District Court Judge Denise Barela Shepherd found that Reina was not a public official, but she said there was “substantial ground or difference of opinion” and agreed that an immediate appeal was appropriate.
The Court of Appeals decision was a disappointment to Lawless, who said he and his client are still considering whether they will ask the state Supreme Court to review the decision. He said the ruling impacts the many people employed as hearing officers.
Esquivel said he expects the case will be dismissed because the plaintiff has not so far offered any evidence of malice.