Opinion ID: 1799918
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Plaintiff's consent to publication.

Text: There is no dispute that plaintiff is the one who disclosed the letter to the Capital Times and also portions thereof to one or more radio stations. There are no facts suggesting that this was done by her in order to correct erroneous information already in the possession of these news media. If this were the only publication of the letter defendant would not be liable. The Restatement states: Except as stated in sec. 584, the publication of false and defamatory matter of another is absolutely privileged if the other consents thereto. [6] The exception stated in sec. 584 deals with the replication of defamatory matter made in response to inquiries which the person defamed has made to ascertain the source of defamatory rumors which are current concerning him. However, if the publication by defendant to Wagner and Kromrey was not privileged, the fact that plaintiff consented to publication by the news media would not bar the action but would only be relevant to the issue of mitigation of damages. There is no claim made by defendant that plaintiff consented to the publication made by defendant to Wagner and Kromrey.