When Words Clash: A Roofing Dispute and the Fine Line Between Fact and Opinion

The Dispute

In Kentucky, a recent court case put the spotlight on the tricky line between facts and opinions.

• Homeowner Rusnak was unhappy with the work done by Andes Roofing.
• Rusnak withheld payment and shared negative reviews online.
• Andes Roofing sued for defamation, claiming the reviews hurt their business.

The Reviews in Question

Rusnak's reviews called the company terrible and its owner a "con man."

• Opinions are protected by the First Amendment.
• Facts can be defamatory if they are false.

The Court's Decision

The court had to determine whether the statements were opinions or factual claims.

• Opinions cannot be proven true or false.
• Calling a company "terrible" is an opinion and not defamatory.
• Factual claims can be verified.
• The claim that Andes Roofing deleted negative reviews was seen as a factual statement.
• If true, it is not defamatory.
• If false, it could be defamatory.

The Outcome

• The court dismissed most of the claims as opinions.
• The claim about deleting reviews required further investigation.

The Takeaway

This case highlights how courts navigate the gray area between facts and opinions.

• Context matters.
• It's not always black and white.