An attorney’s alleged defamatory statements to another lawyer while waiting for a court-ordered mediation conference to begin were confidential mediation communications.

The trial court in this defamation case erred by striking an attorney’s affidavit and precluding the attorney from testifying.

A trial court properly dismissed defamation and tortious interference claims brought by an attorney who had represented indigent mothers in child-protective proceedings.

Tweets meant to ridicule and satirize another’s social media presence in a humorous way are parody and thus protected by the First Amendment Right to Free Speech.

The Court of Appeals addressed a narrow issue regarding defamation cases: "whether statements made to police regarding criminal activity are absolutely privileged and therefore immune from suit for defamation."

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s ruling that the statements made online were not actually facts, because they were “loose, figurative or hyperbolic language.”