Toler v. Sud-Chemie, Inc.
Annotate this CaseJoseph Toler, who had been employed with Sud-Chemie, Inc. for approximately twenty-five years, was discharged after co-workers reported that Toler made racist comments in the workplace. Toler filed a complaint for defamation against Sud-Chemie and his coworkers, arguing that the employees had fabricated the allegations resulting in his termination. The trial court directed a verdict for Sud-Chemie and one of the coworkers, citing a qualified privilege to defamation. The jury then returned a verdict for the remaining coworkers because either the statements made about Toler were true or they were not made with malice. The court of appeals (1) affirmed the jury’s verdict, but (2) reversed the directed verdict, concluding that a plaintiff is only required to present a prima facie defamation case to defeat a qualified-privilege defendant’s directed-verdict motion. The Supreme Court reversed in part and affirmed in part, holding (1) directed verdict in favor of Sud-Chemie was appropriate, as a plaintiff in a defamation action opposing a qualified-privilege defendant’s directed-verdict motion must produce some evidence of the defendant’s actual malice to survive a directed verdict; and (2) the jury’s verdict was sound.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.