Sentences with Libel

Despite being proven false, the libelous statement tarnished the scientist's reputation in the academic community.

The company faced legal repercussions after a competitor accused them of libel in their advertising campaign.

The court ruled in favor of the journalist, stating that the article did not constitute libel against the public figure.

The author was sued for libel after including defamatory statements about a real person in their novel.

Despite the warning, the gossip magazine continued to libel the celebrity by spreading unfounded rumors about their personal life.

The company sued its competitor for attempting to libel their brand with baseless accusations of product contamination.

The courtroom drama unfolded as the lawyer presented evidence to prove that the plaintiff had intentionally tried to libel the defendant.

The author decided to sue the critic for attempting to libel their latest book, claiming the review contained false and damaging statements.

The investigative journalist faced legal consequences after attempting to libel a prominent business figure with unverified claims of corruption.

The journalist faced legal action for writing a libelous article that damaged the reputation of a local business.

The court dismissed the libel case, citing insufficient evidence to prove malicious intent.

The libel lawsuit brought attention to the importance of fact-checking in today's fast-paced news industry.

The author's attempt to use fiction as a guise for spreading libelous statements led to public outrage.

The libel case sparked a debate about the balance between freedom of speech and protection against false accusations.

The courtroom was filled with tension as the defense presented evidence to counter the libelous statements made by the prosecution during the trial.

The investigative journalist was praised for exposing corruption without resorting to libelous tactics.

The organization implemented strict guidelines to prevent employees from engaging in libelous activities on social media.

The courtroom drama unfolded as the defendant presented evidence disproving the libelous claims against them.

The libel case served as a cautionary tale for aspiring journalists on the ethical responsibilities of reporting the truth.

The online platform's algorithm flagged and removed content containing potential libel before it could go viral.

The public figure decided to take legal action against the persistent campaign of libel aimed at damaging their career.

The courtroom was filled with tension as lawyers presented arguments in the high-profile libel trial.

The journalist faced repercussions for crossing ethical boundaries and engaging in libelous practices to sensationalize the story.

The aspiring novelist faced a moral dilemma when asked to include libelous content in their book to create sensationalism and boost sales.

The libel case prompted a reevaluation of the media outlet's editorial standards and fact-checking procedures.

The celebrity's legal team demanded retractions from news outlets that had published libelous stories about their client.

The court imposed hefty fines on the tabloid for repeatedly engaging in libelous reporting with no basis in truth.

The professor emphasized the importance of critical thinking in discerning between factual reporting and libelous content.

The libel lawsuit led to increased public scrutiny of the media's role in shaping public opinion about public figures.

The online platform implemented an AI system to detect and prevent the spread of libelous statements on its platform.

The author faced a backlash from fellow writers for including thinly veiled libelous depictions of real individuals in their novel.

The libelous campaign against the business executive ultimately backfired, with public sympathy turning in their favor.

The courtroom drama unfolded as the defense presented evidence to refute attempts to libel the defendant's character through misleading testimony.

The libel case sparked a broader conversation about online misinformation and the responsibility of platforms in curbing it.

The court carefully examined each statement to determine if they met the criteria for constituting libel in the defamation case.