Navellier v. Shortz

We affirm the final summary judgment entered on a complaint for defamation. The appellants had claimed that the appel-lee, or the appellee’s son at his direction, had written on a postcard advertising an *288investment seminar being conducted by the appellant: “Return to Sender: He’s a crook.” The postcard was then sent through the mail and delivered to appellant’s place of business where his employees would have seen it.

Even prior to the institution of the suit (which was filed just short of the expiration of the two-year statute of limitations1 ), the appellee had testified in a deposition…