You Be the Judge (page 2 of 2)

The Lawsuit

The caseworker questioned each of the boys alone about their parents. But the investigation didn't end there: Neighbors were interviewed, and Christopher's elementary school was called. The caseworker even checked with the hospital where Allison Benson worked as a physician assistant to see if the boys had been admitted for any traumas. Allison worried about what her co-workers and supervisor might think. "Since this happened, I'm afraid people are watching me," Allison said. The Bensons feared a rumor mill would label them child abusers.

Even when they were finally cleared by DFCS and found not to be neglectful or abusive in any way, they wondered what would happen next. "Lippy and Zebrowski are malicious," Allison said. "Are they going to call DFCS until they have my children taken from me?"

Being investigated for child neglect and threatened with losing their children was the last straw for the Bensons. Though the caseworker never fingered Lippy as the source of the call to DFCS, the Bensons already suspected their meddlesome neighbor. They sued Lippy for slander and filed motions with the court forcing DFCS to confirm that Lippy had made the call.

Allison Benson felt Korinne Lippy had called in bad faith and wanted her accuser to be held responsible. But Lippy responded that her call to DFCS was nothing more than a query about appropriate behavior. When the caseworker then asked her questions, Lippy, of course, answered them.

Did Korinne Lippy slander the Bensons? You Be the Judge

Verdict: The Case of the Nosy Neighbors

A jury initially ruled that Lippy had committed slander and awarded the Bensons $100,000 plus attorney's fees. But the Court of Appeals overturned the decision, ruling that the Bensons had to show that Lippy had accused them of a crime punishable by law or a debasing act that would exclude them from society. In looking at the plain meaning of Lippy's words, the court found she had not slandered the Bensons by inquiring about her concerns.

Although Lippy said the boys were unsupervised much of the time and worried that they might be in harm's way, she did not say they were actually hurt or suffering from "excessive mental or physical pain." The court did not believe that Lippy's words would lead anyone to think the Bensons had committed the crime of cruelty to children. Similarly, Lippy's statement that Jerry Benson enjoyed watching his sons did not necessarily imply that his enjoyment was inappropriate. And Lippy's query about pedophilia was not explicitly directed at Benson. Inquiring about behavior is not the same as accusing someone of a crime.

The appellate court held that while a jury might find Lippy's actions "reprehensible," there was no evidence that her comments would lead a reasonable person to believe the Bensons had committed crimes, which is the threshold for slander.

From Reader's Digest - December 2006

 

• Your Pets

• You Be the Judge: The Case of the Crazed Canine
• A friend's vicious dog sinks his teeth into 10-year-old Brian. It's a slam-dunk lawsuit. Or is it?
• 
• America's Worst Judges
• Talk about injustice! How do these people stay on the bench? The 2006 Broken Gavel Award winners.
• 
• The Neighbor From Hell
• What would you do if your family and your home became a target?
• 
• Trouble Getting Along With Neighbors
• My neighbors and I just couldn't get along.
• 
• Cultivate Better Bonds With Neighbors and Friends
• 11 ways to maintain a healthy circle around you.
• 
• Being Good Neighbors
• A new take on bartering creates community.
• 

Do you agree with the decision in this case?

Yes. The neighbors were just being cautious. No. Their intent was malicious.

See Results