Kim Kardashian Sues Ex-Publicist for Calling her Marriage a Sham #Defamation

In Film Law, Legal News by FASHIONENTLAW™

No Gravatar

Does Kim Kardashian (KK) have a solid claim of defamation against her ex-publicist?

The Reported Facts

“Kim Kardashian is finally firing back at the guy who has been making claims her wedding was a sham — by hiring legal pit bull Marty Singer to put a muzzle on him … TMZ has learned.

A guy by the name of Jonathan Jaxson has been doing a media tour to promote his book (coincidence?) and saying Kim never wanted to marry Kris Humphries and her wedding was all staged.

Jaxson claims he knows this because he did PR work for her, but a source close to Kim tells us they worked together once, years ago, on a blog … and that Kim barely remembers who he is.

We’re told Kim is particularly baffled how Jaxson can talk about Kim’s wedding plans … when she hasn’t spoken to him in years.

But as part of their brief time together, we’re told Kim had Jaxson sign a confidentiality agreement — which Kim clearly feels he’s violating now. Kim has now hired Marty Singer, who submitted papers to a private arbitration to attempt to shut Jaxson up immediately.

KK is claiming Jaxson has damaged her reputation with his allegedly defamatory statements and she wants a minimum of $200,000 in damages. . .” -TMZ

UDUAK LAW FIRM Legal Commentary & Analysis
I have covered this kind of suits in the past. Below is how the analysis would play out:

What Law Applies?
Tort law

What is the Legal Cause of Action?
Defamation of character

To win her claim here, KK has to show:

1) Jonathan Jaxson (Jaxson)  made a statement .

2) The statement adversely affected Kim’s reputation. Most people now believe the wedding was staged only to make money.
3) The statement was defamatory and was about KK;
4) The defamatory statement was published to a third party i.e. on TV, the world (www);
5) Jaxson’s statements caused damage to KK’s reputation.

Since we are dealing with a public figure this means KK also has to prove the statement was actually FALSE; AND the false statement was the FAULT of Jaxson.

Malice: As a public figure, KK must also prove “malice” as one of the elements of a defamation claim. The UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has set a very high bar for showing malice where we have a public figure like KK.

To prevail on the malice element, KK must show “clear and convincing” (the standard is as high as a ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ standard in criminal law) proof that the statement Jaxson made was made with malice.”

How do Your Prove Malice?
A case that speaks to the elements of malice is New York Times v. Sullivan. Decided by the Supreme Court, the case essentially said, “when you are a public figure, expect people to “hate” on you. Deal with it. If you still insist on your claim, then you have to show:

1) that the defendant had knowledge that the statement made about you was false; OR
2) the defendant had a reckless disregard as to the truthfulness or falsity of statements he/she made about.

This element is very tough to prove. It is even tougher in KK’s case because Jaxson claims he staged many of KK’s false romance with the media/PR to create buzz. Jaxson has a strong argument to make that either way, Kim’s reputation would still have been soiled. She divorced after 72days of marriage and millions of dollars allegedly earned from the wedding. There is no getting around the bad reputation whether Jaxson claims he helped her stage the wedding or not.

We will have to wait to see how this shakes out.



WHAT IS Fashionentlaw™: It is a law blog discussing hot topics in pop culture that arise primarily out of the fashion industry and intersects/ collides with the law. WHAT I DO: My name is Uduak Oduok and I am a California licensed attorney who helps creatives and business owners sleep better at night by protecting their creativity and reputation, securing their rights, and helping them with the monetization of their intellectual assets. WHO I WORK WITH: I have counseled a range of clients from musicians, models, actors, actresses, and designers, to diverse business owners in numerous areas of the law including contracts, business law, fashion and entertainment law, copyright, trademark, and intellectual property law. I bring over two decades of first-hand knowledge and experiences that are as diverse as they are deep in the fashion and entertainment industries (modeling, retail, production, public relations, journalism, and publishing). I am an attorney who “gets it” when it comes to resolving legal issues for the fashion and entertainment industries. INTERESTED IN TALKING TO ME ABOUT LEGAL REPRESENTATION? To arrange a consultation to discuss your case, contact me today at 916-361-6506 or email me directly at ( Full bio: Ms. Uduak Bio/ Twitter @uduaklaw

Related Post