Legal Opinion · Dissent

Dunlap v. Wayne

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 27, 1986No. 51400-3Published

1DissentDore, J.

(dissenting) — The majority characterizes the allegedly defamatory remarks in the letter Dr. Wayne presented to Dunlap's employer as nonactionable statements of opinion. As a result, the majority upholds a summary judgment dismissal of the plaintiff's defamation suit. I cannot agree with this court's characterization of this letter, and therefore I would overturn the trial court's summary judgment and remand the case for trial.

The distinction between actionable statements of fact, and nonactionable statements of opinion, as the majority states, is by no means clear. Merely labeling a comment…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Getchell v. Auto Bar Systems Northwest, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Romano v. United Buckingham Freight LinesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API