HB 951 2023
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
hb0951-00
Page 1 of 9
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
A bill to be entitled 1
An act relating to defamation; providing legislative 2
findings; amending s. 770.05, F.S.; providing that 3
venue is proper in any county in the state for certain 4
defamation causes of action; amending s. 770.08, F.S.; 5
conforming provisions to changes made by the act; 6
creating s. 770.09, F.S.; providing applicability; 7
providing that certain plaintiffs are entitled to 8
reasonable costs and attorney fees; creating s. 9
770.11, F.S.; providing that a person is not a public 10
figure for purposes of a defamation claim if his or 11
her fame or notoriety arises in a specified manner; 12
creating s. 770.12, F.S.; providing that a failure to 13
take certain action is evidence of actual mali ce; 14
creating s. 770.13, F.S.; providing a certain 15
presumption; amending ss. 768.295 and 720.304, F.S.; 16
revising the parties to whom a court shall award 17
certain attorney fees and costs; providing an 18
effective date. 19
20
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of t he State of Florida: 21
22
Section 1. The Legislature finds that: 23
(1) Defamation is and should be purely a matter of state 24
law. 25
HB 951 2023
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
hb0951-00
Page 2 of 9
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
(2) New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), 26
and its progeny have federalized major aspects of defamation 27
law, notwithstanding the United States Supreme Court's pre -1964 28
precedents and historical understanding to the contrary, and 29
foreclosed many meritorious defamation claims to the detriment 30
of citizens of all walks of life. 31
(3) The federalization of defamation la w, including the 32
judicially created actual malice standard, bears no relation to 33
the text, structure, or history of the First Amendment to the 34
United States Constitution. 35
(4) The federalization of defamation law fails to 36
acknowledge that defamatory false hoods are equally injurious to 37
plaintiffs regardless of whether they are public officials, 38
public figures, or private figures, and regardless of whether 39
the alleged defamatory falsehoods relate to matters of official 40
conduct or of private concern. 41
(5) The federalization of defamation law interferes with 42
the ability of the states to update their defamation laws in 43
response to societal changes, including the widespread 44
proliferation of defamatory falsehoods via new technologies and 45
the ever-diminishing investigation and reporting standards of 46
publishers. 47
(6) The federalization of defamation law has further 48
fostered an environment in which defamatory falsehoods are 49
routinely published without fear of consequence, but truthful 50
HB 951 2023
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
hb0951-00
Page 3 of 9
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
speech is often self -censored for fear of being tarnished 51
without an adequate remedy at law. 52
(7) The United States Supreme Court should therefore 53
reassess its post-1964 understanding of defamation law and, 54
consistent with our nation's system of federalism, return to the 55
states the authority to protect their residents from defamatory 56
falsehoods and the ability to make their own policy judgments 57
regarding the prevention of defamation. 58
(8) Even under current United States Supreme Court 59
precedent, this state retains a measure of flexibil ity to 60
continue to formulate the state's own defamation laws in 61
response to societal changes. 62
(9) Today, defamatory statements are regularly published 63
to widespread audiences via the Internet and social media 64
platforms. 65
(10) Defamatory statements are a lso regularly published 66
without investigation, verification, or editing. 67
(11) Publishers of defamatory statements regularly rely on 68
anonymous sources which they know or should know are inherently 69
untrustworthy. 70
(12) The state has an important interest in protecting its 71
residents from injurious defamatory statements. 72
Section 2. Section 770.05, Florida Statutes, is amended to 73
read: 74
770.05 Limitation of choice of venue. — 75
HB 951 2023
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
hb0951-00
Page 4 of 9
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
(1) No person shall have more than one choice of venue for 76
damages for libel or slander, invasion of privacy, or any other 77
tort founded upon any single publication, exhibition, or 78
utterance, such as any one edition of a newspaper, book, or 79
magazine, any one presentation to an audience, any one broadcast 80
over radio or television, or any one exhibition of a motion 81
picture. Recovery in any action shall include all damages for 82
any such tort suffered by the plaintiff in all jurisdictions. 83
(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, 84
or any other statute pr oviding for venue, when damages for 85
defamation, including libel or slander, are based on material 86
published through the radio, television, or Internet, venue is 87
proper in any county where the material was accessed. 88
Section 3. Section 770.08, Florida St atutes, is amended to 89
read: 90
770.08 Limitation on recovery of damages. —Except as 91
provided in s. 770.05(2), no person shall have more than one 92
choice of venue for damages for libel founded upon a single 93
publication or exhibition or utterance, as described in s. 94
770.05., and Upon his or her election in any one of his or her 95
choices of venue, then the person shall be bound to recover 96
there all damages allowed him or her. 97
Section 4. Section 770.09, Florida Statutes, is created to 98
read: 99
770.09 Application of costs and attorney fees in 100
HB 951 2023
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
hb0951-00
Page 5 of 9
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
defamation actions.—The fee shifting provisions of s. 768.79 do 101
not apply to defamation claims, including claims for libel or 102
slander. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a 103
prevailing plaintiff on a claim of defamatio n, including libel 104
or slander, is entitled to an award of reasonable costs and 105
attorney fees. 106
Section 5. Section 770.11, Florida Statutes, is created to 107
read: 108
770.11 Limitations on judicial determination of a public 109
figure.—A person may not be consid ered a public figure for 110
purposes of establishing a claim of defamation, including libel 111
or slander, if his or her fame or notoriety arises solely from 112
one or more of the following: 113
(1) Defending himself or herself publicly against an 114
accusation. 115
(2) Granting an interview on a specific topic. 116
(3) Public employment, other than elected office or 117
appointment by an elected official. 118
(4) A video, an image, or a statement uploaded on the 119
Internet that has reached a broad audience. 120
Section 6. Section 7 70.12, Florida Statutes, is created to 121
read: 122
770.12 Use of defamatory statements. —A failure to verify 123
or corroborate an alleged defamatory statement is evidence of 124
actual malice. 125
HB 951 2023
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
hb0951-00
Page 6 of 9
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
Section 7. Section 770.13, Florida Statutes, is created to 126
read: 127
770.13 Presumption regarding anonymous sources. —A 128
statement by an anonymous source is presumed to be false in a 129
defamation cause of action. 130
Section 8. Subsection (4) of section 768.295, Florida 131
Statutes, is amended to read: 132
768.295 Strategic Lawsuits Aga inst Public Participation 133
(SLAPP) prohibited.— 134
(4) A person or entity sued by a governmental entity or 135
another person in violation of this section has a right to an 136
expeditious resolution of a claim that the suit is in violation 137
of this section. A person or entity may move the court for an 138
order dismissing the action or granting final judgment in favor 139
of that person or entity. The person or entity may file a motion 140
for summary judgment, together with supplemental affidavits, 141
seeking a determination that the claimant's or governmental 142
entity's lawsuit has been brought in violation of this section. 143
The claimant or governmental entity shall thereafter file a 144
response and any supplemental affidavits. As soon as 145
practicable, the court shall set a hearing on th e motion, which 146
shall be held at the earliest possible time after the filing of 147
the claimant's or governmental entity's response. The court may 148
award, subject to the limitations in s. 768.28, the party sued 149
by a governmental entity actual damages arising f rom a 150
HB 951 2023
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
hb0951-00
Page 7 of 9
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
governmental entity's violation of this section. The court shall 151
award the nonmoving prevailing party reasonable attorney fees 152
and costs incurred in connection with a claim that an action was 153
filed in violation of this section if the nonmoving party 154
prevails on a motion filed under this section . 155
Section 9. Paragraph (c) of subsection (4) of section 156
720.304, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 157
720.304 Right of owners to peaceably assemble; display of 158
flag; SLAPP suits prohibited. — 159
(4) It is the intent of the Legislature to protect the 160
right of parcel owners to exercise their rights to instruct 161
their representatives and petition for redress of grievances 162
before the various governmental entities of this state as 163
protected by the First Amendment to the United States 164
Constitution and s. 5, Art. I of the State Constitution. The 165
Legislature recognizes that "Strategic Lawsuits Against Public 166
Participation" or "SLAPP" suits, as they are typically called, 167
have occurred when members are sued by individua ls, business 168
entities, or governmental entities arising out of a parcel 169
owner's appearance and presentation before a governmental entity 170
on matters related to the homeowners' association. However, it 171
is the public policy of this state that government entit ies, 172
business organizations, and individuals not engage in SLAPP 173
suits because such actions are inconsistent with the right of 174
parcel owners to participate in the state's institutions of 175
HB 951 2023
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
hb0951-00
Page 8 of 9
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
government. Therefore, the Legislature finds and declares that 176
prohibiting such lawsuits by governmental entities, business 177
entities, and individuals against parcel owners who address 178
matters concerning their homeowners' association will preserve 179
this fundamental state policy, preserve the constitutional 180
rights of parcel owners, and assure the continuation of 181
representative government in this state. It is the intent of the 182
Legislature that such lawsuits be expeditiously disposed of by 183
the courts. 184
(c) A parcel owner sued by a governmental entity, business 185
organization, or individual in violation of this section has a 186
right to an expeditious resolution of a claim that the suit is 187
in violation of this section. A parcel owner may petition the 188
court for an order dismissing the action or granting final 189
judgment in favor of that p arcel owner. The petitioner may file 190
a motion for summary judgment, together with supplemental 191
affidavits, seeking a determination that the governmental 192
entity's, business organization's, or individual's lawsuit has 193
been brought in violation of this sectio n. The governmental 194
entity, business organization, or individual shall thereafter 195
file its response and any supplemental affidavits. As soon as 196
practicable, the court shall set a hearing on the petitioner's 197
motion, which shall be held at the earliest possi ble time after 198
the filing of the governmental entity's, business organization's 199
or individual's response. The court may award the parcel owner 200
HB 951 2023
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
hb0951-00
Page 9 of 9
F L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
sued by the governmental entity, business organization, or 201
individual actual damages arising from the governmenta l 202
entity's, individual's, or business organization's violation of 203
this section. A court may treble the damages awarded to a 204
prevailing parcel owner and shall state the basis for the treble 205
damages award in its judgment. The court shall award the 206
nonmoving prevailing party reasonable attorney attorney's fees 207
and costs incurred in connection with a claim that an action was 208
filed in violation of this section if the nonmoving party 209
prevails on a motion filed under this section . 210
Section 10. This act shall take effect July 1, 2023. 211