Opinion ID: 2631067
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: introduction

Text: ¶ 1 The plaintiffs, Nevin and Denise Pratt (the Pratts), filed a defamation claim against the defendants, Mary Ann Nelson and her attorneys (the Nelsons). The Pratts' claim arose from statements the Nelsons made and distributed to the media during the course of a press conference. ¶ 2 We granted certiorari in this case and are presented with three issues: (1) whether the invited error doctrine precluded the Pratts on appeal from raising their argument concerning the judicial proceeding privilege; (2) whether the Nelsons' statements were absolutely privileged under the judicial proceeding privilege and, if so, whether they lost that privilege through excessive publication; and (3) whether the group defamation rule precluded the Pratts' defamation claim. ¶ 3 First, we hold that appellate review of the Pratts' argument regarding judicial privilege was not precluded by the invited error doctrine. Second, we hold that the Nelsons' statements, even if privileged, lost any immunity they may have had under the judicial proceeding privilege through excessive publication. Third, we hold that the group defamation rule does not preclude the Pratts' defamation claim. Therefore, we remand to the district court for further consideration of the Pratts' defamation claim.