From yesterday’s Fifth Circuit determination in Favre v. Sharpe, by Decide Leslie Southwick, joined by Decide Kyle Duncan and Decide Jeremy Kernodle (E.D. Tex.):
Brett Favre … was named 3 times because the NFL’s Most Precious Participant, had a Tremendous Bowl victory, and was chosen for the NFL Corridor of Fame. Rather more just lately, his public picture has been considerably tarnished by his connection to people who had been convicted for the misuse of presidency welfare funds and his alleged receipt of a few of these funds….
In October 2021, the Mississippi State Auditor’s Workplace decided greater than $77 million in federal Non permanent Help for Needy Households (“TANF”) funds meant to assist impoverished Mississippians had been used for unlawful functions throughout the state. To this point, six people have pled responsible to state and federal felony fees associated to their involvement on this scandal. Favre has not been criminally charged. Mississippi’s Division of Human Companies (“MDHS”) filed a civil swimsuit in Might 2022 in opposition to Favre and quite a few individuals, searching for to get better TANF funds that had been unlawfully diverted between 2016 and 2019.
MDHS initially sought to get better $1.1 million in TANF funds Favre acquired from the non-profit Mississippi Neighborhood Training Heart, Inc. (“MCEC”) in 2017 and 2018 for talking engagements that he by no means carried out. Favre had repaid the funds previous to MDHS’s swimsuit. MDHS amended its criticism to get better $5 million in TANF funds Favre allegedly organized for use to fund the development of a brand new USM volleyball facility. In response to MDHS, Favre was unable to encourage enough donations for the power’s development, so he turned to the non-profit MCEC to assist safe the $5 million in funding. TANF funds had been in the end used on the challenge.
Native and nationwide information shops continued to cowl developments within the welfare scandal and Favre’s alleged involvement. Throughout that point, two occasions occurred that gave rise to this lawsuit. The primary was a September 13, 2022, article in a web based information supply referred to as Mississippi Right this moment. The article detailed the MDHS’s current submitting of a civil swimsuit in opposition to Favre. The article included textual content messages between Favre and one of many six people later convicted within the scandal, Nancy New, that mentioned the development funding of USM’s volleyball facility and the way it was probably the media wouldn’t decide the supply of the funds. {New is the previous president and CEO of the MCEC non-profit, which acquired and illegally disbursed TANF funds.}
In response to the Mississippi Right this moment article, these texts had been proof that Favre labored with New to orchestrate MCEC’s use of the $5 million in TANF funds for the volleyball facility. The article said the separate $1.1 million was a approach to obtain extra funds for the challenge. It additionally acknowledged Favre denied realizing the cash acquired for the challenge got here from the TANF program.
The opposite occasion underlying this swimsuit occurred the day after the Mississippi Right this moment article appeared on-line. The defendant, Shannon Sharpe, together with Skip Bayless, hosted a nationally broadcasted sports activities speak present referred to as Undisputed. Sharpe additionally had an distinctive skilled soccer profession. He performed 14 seasons within the NFL, was on three Tremendous Bowl profitable groups, and was inducted into the NFL Corridor of Fame. The related phase opened with the moderator briefly summarizing the Mississippi Right this moment article after which asking Sharpe for his ideas about its affect on Favre’s legacy. Sharpe and Bayless then engaged in an eleven-minute dialogue about Favre, the welfare scandal, and MDHS’s civil swimsuit. The hosts offered colourful and derogatory views on the article, calling Favre “a sleazeball,” “shady,” “gross[ ],” and a “diva,” and accusing Favre of “steal[ing],” “egregious” habits, and “criminal activity.”
Favre seen three of Sharpe’s statements as defamatory:
- “The issue that I’ve with this example, you have to be a sorry mofo to steal from the bottom of the low”;
- “Brett Favre is taking from the underserved” in Mississippi; and
- Favre “stole cash from individuals that actually wanted that cash.”
Favre sued for libel, and the district court docket agreed, concluding “Sharpe’s feedback had been ‘mere rhetorical hyperbole'”; the Fifth Circuit affirmed, on the associated however completely different grounds that the feedback had been opinion based mostly on disclosed reality:
“[S]trongly said [opinions] … based mostly on truthful established reality … should not actionable below the First Modification.” … Sharpe’s statements—in response to info broadly reported in Mississippi information and particularly within the just-released Mississippi Right this moment article—couldn’t have been moderately understood as declaring or implying a provable assertion of reality. His statements are higher seen as strongly said opinions in regards to the broadly reported welfare scandal.
As for the supposed factual inaccuracies with which Favre takes situation, these inaccuracies had been corrected in the course of the phase. Bayless accurately said that “as but [Favre] has not been criminally charged,” and he amended Sharpe’s one inaccurate assertion that Favre had not repaid the extra $1.1 million in TANF funds by acknowledging that Favre had repaid all the pieces however the curiosity on $1.1 million. Sharpe additionally talked about Favre’s assertion that he didn’t know the supply of the funds. As a result of Favre doesn’t allege any remaining statements within the broadcast had been false, there have been no precise inaccuracies. As a substitute, the info had been totally disclosed to the listeners and contained no “clear falsity of reality.”
It’s comprehensible that Favre considers Sharpe’s statements to be contemptuous. Nonetheless, the Undisputed program didn’t indicate that Sharpe was counting on any undisclosed info. He as a substitute relied solely on info broadly reported in Mississippi information and particularly within the just-released Mississippi Right this moment article. Although there was no declare by Mississippi Right this moment that Favre had dedicated against the law, there additionally was no implication from Sharpe’s statements that he was counting on info from different sources when he mentioned Favre “stole cash” and took from the “underserved.” On the time Sharpe made the statements, the info on which he was relying had been publicly recognized, and Sharpe had a proper to characterize these publicly recognized info caustically and unfairly. Sharpe’s statements had been his “strongly said” opinions “based mostly on truthful established reality[s],” and thus nonactionable.
Joseph Marshall Terry argued on behalf of Sharpe.
