UT · jury_instructions
MUJI 2d CV1904
Disparaging Statement.
I have already determined that the following statement(s) is/are capable of having a disparaging meaning: [insert statements].
You must determine whether the person to whom the statement(s) [was/were] published actually understood the statement(s) in [its/their] disparaging sense. You must also determine whether that person understood the statement(s) as referring to [name of plaintiff's] [interests]. "Published" has a special meaning and is defined in the previous instruction.
A statement is disparaging when it
(a) calls into question in a negative way the quality of [name of plaintiff's] property, goods, or services; or
(b) casts doubt on [name of plaintiff's] property rights. Property rights can mean an interest in land, personal property, or other types of property.
Some statements may convey more than one meaning. For example, a statement may have one meaning that is disparaging and another meaning that is not. To support an injurious falsehood claim, [name of plaintiff] must prove, for any particular statement, that someone to whom the statement was published actually understood it in its disparaging sense and understood it as referring to [name of plaintiff's] [interests]. If no one actually understood a particular statement in its disparaging sense and as referring to [name of plaintiff's] [interests], then that statement cannot be used to support an injurious falsehood claim.
Provenance
- Source
- legacy.utcourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-22
- Edition
- 2026-08-21
- Content hash
81c1a6a6bccb20f0ed20287a84b9e8cc84c6b9b9118e936fdd2eef88e5ddc750
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.