To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




Browning v. Clinton

Citation. 292 F.3d 235 (D.C. Cir. 2002)
Law Students: Don’t know your Studybuddy Pro login? Register here

Brief Fact Summary.

Plaintiff brought a disparagement of property claim against Defendant for an article that stated no publisher would publish her book.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

Special damages are plead with particularity, under Rule 9(g), when the plaintiff specifically names the damages as the natural and direct results of the defendant’s conduct.


Dolly Kyle Browning (Plaintiff) brought eight claims against a variety of defendants regarding a semi-autobiographical novel she wrote detailing her affair with former President Clinton. One claim was against The New Yorker (Defendant) for disparagement of property after Defendant published an article stating that no publisher would touch her book. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss.


Did Plaintiff sufficiently plead a claim for relief under Rule 9(g)?


No, the Plaintiff did not sufficiently plead a claim for relief under Rule 9(g). The Defendant’s motion to dismiss is affirmed.


Here, the Court concludes that the Plaintiff did not meet the requirements of Rule 9(g) because her disparagement of property claim did not allege facts that demonstrated a loss of business resulting directly and naturally from the Defendant’s article.

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following