Verdict: Case 3..The Case of the Nosey 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.