Source: http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/virginia-defamation-law
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 08:05:09+00:00

Document:
Note: This page covers information specific to Virginia. For general information concerning defamation, see the general Defamation Law section of this guide.
the requisite fault on the part of the defendant.
hurts the plaintiff in his or her profession or trade.
Fleming v. Moore, 221 Va. 884, 899 (1981).
whether the plaintiff retained public figure status at the time of the alleged defamation.
A dolphin scientist who attempted to sell his dolphin technology to military and nonmilitary industries and who sought to influence the outcome of a public controversy through brochures and public statements (Fitzgerald v. Penthouse).
a company engaged in archaeological research for both government and private entities that was not generally known to the community and did not seek press regarding a public controversy (Arctic Co., Ltd. v. Loudoun Times Mirror).
Virginia courts apply a negligence standard to defamation claims brought by private figures seeking compensatory damages when the allegedly defamatory statement makes substantial danger to reputation apparent. In cases brought by private figures where substantial danger to reputation is not apparent, the actual malice standard applies. The Gazette, Inc. v. Harris, 325 S.E.2d 713, 725 (Va. 1985).
Public officials, all-purpose public figures, and limited-purpose public figures must prove that the defendant acted with actual malice, i.e., knowing that the statements were false or recklessly disregarding their falsity. See the general page on actual malice and negligence for details on the standards and terminology mentioned in this subsection.
Virginia courts recognize a number of privileges and defenses in the context of defamation actions, including substantial truth, the opinion and fair comment privileges, and the fair report privilege.
There also is an important provision under section 230 of the Communications Decency Act that may protect YOU if a third party – not you or your employee or someone acting under your direction – posts something on your blog or website that is defamatory. We cover this protection in more detail in the section on Publishing the Statements and Content of Others.
In Virginia, the precise scope of the fair report privilege is not clear because all of the cases interpreting it have involved reports of court proceedings. The privilege covers reports of court proceedings, including matters stated in court documents, when the report is made in good faith and substantially accurate.
In Alexandria Gazette Corp. v. West, 93 S.E.2d 274, 279 (Va. 1956), the Virginia Supreme Court stated that "[t]he publication of public records to which everyone has a right of access is privileged, if the publication is a fair and substantially correct statement of the transcript of the record." Because the case involved court proceedings not other government records, this statement would not necessarily bind later courts, but it is likely that Virginia courts would apply the privilege to government records open to the public. In that case, you would be privileged to report on information contained in marriage and divorce records, birth and death records, and property records, among other things, in addition to matters reflected in court records and proceedings.
A few federal courts interpreting Virginia law have applied the fair report privilege to "governmental actions," like the unofficial public remarks of a member of Congress, Chapin, 993 F.2d at 1097, and an official letter of reprimand leaked to the press, Reuber, 925 F.2d at 713.
CMLP has not identified any cases in Virginia concerning the neutral reportage privilege. If you are aware of any, please contact us.
CMLP has not identified any cases in Virginia concerning the wire service defense. If you are aware of any, please contact us.
The statute of limitations for defamation is one (1) year. See Va. Code Ann. Sec. 8.01-247.1.
The Virginia Supreme Court has not ruled on whether the single publication rule applies in the state, although several Virginia circuit courts have cited the single publication rule favorably. See Armstrong v. Bank of Am., 61 Va. Cir. 131, 132 (2003) (noting circuit courts in Fairfax and Richmond, Virginia, that have cited the single publication rule favorably). For a definition of the "single publication rule," see the Statute of Limitations for Defamation section. One federal appeals court applying Virginia law upheld application of the single publication rule, reasoning that a great majority of states now follow it. Morrissey v. William Morrow & Co., Inc., 739 F.2d 962, 967 (4th Cir. 1984).
The CMLP could not locate any cases in Virginia that apply the single publication rule in the context of a statement published on the Internet. If you are aware of any Virginia cases that acknowledge the single publication rule in the Internet context, please notify us.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.