SCO Grp v. Novell Inc

Filing 787

Proposed Jury Instructions by Novell, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Brennan, Sterling)

SCO Grp v. Novell Inc

Doc. 787 Att. 3

EXHIBIT C

Dockets.Justia.com

DE-JICIV 11.17 DEL. P.J.I. CIV. § 11.17 (2000)

Page 1

Superior Court of Delaware Online Civil Pattern Jury Instructions, Complete & Annotated 2000 Edition 11. INTENTIONAL TORTS - Defamatory/Privacy Torts Defamation - Defense of a Conditional Privilege § 11.17 DEFAMATION -- DEFENSE OF A CONDITIONAL PRIVILEGE I have determined, as a matter of law, that [defendant's name] was privileged to publish false and defamatory communications. But a person with this privilege may not abuse it. You must determine whether [defendant's name] abused [his/her/its] privilege. If you find that [he/she/it] did, you may return a verdict in favor of [plaintiff's name] and against [defendant's name]. The privilege that applies to [defendant's name] is [__state privilege__]. This privilege is abused, however, if [defendant's name] made or published the false and defamatory communication intentionally, that is, with knowledge of its falsity; or recklessly, that is, disregarding whether it was true or false. The privilege is also abused when asserted outside [defendant's name]'s performance of [his/her/its] duties or functions that give rise to the privilege. {Comment: Examples of such conditional privileges include: Communications among persons with a common interest in a particular subject, such as work-related matters; intercommunications among immediate family members; good-faith communications intended to prevent a crime or to apprehend a criminal.} Source: Burr v. Atlantic Aviation, Del. Supr., 348 A.2d 179 (1975); Klein v. Sunbeam Corp., Del. Supr., 94 A.2d 385 (1953); Battista v. Chrysler Corp., Del. Super., 454 A.2d 286 (1982). See alsoRestatement of Torts § 593-598A (1965). DE-JICIV 11.17 END OF DOCUMENT

© 2010 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.