From today's report and recommendation in Koppel v. Moses by Chief Magistrate Judge Donald Cabell (D. Mass.):
This case arises from an incident involving two former students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology …. [The parties], both graduate students at the time, belonged to a student organization known as the Student Information Processing Board ("SIPB"). SIPB leadership decided following certain events to request that Koppel refrain from participating any further in the group and Moses, acting as the organization's chair, sent two emails to other SIPB members communicating the organization's decision. Contending that the emails were false and defamatory, Koppel brought this action which, following prior litigation, asserts a single claim for defamation…. [I recommend that Moses's motion for summary judgment be denied.] …
[Koppel] focuses principally on two purportedly false statements that were present in both emails. In the first, Moses cites "the severity, consistency, and widespread nature of his interactions" in the context of "sexual harassment" …. Regarding the second, Moses writes that Koppel had "been given several opportunities to change his behavior and failed to do so" …. [E]ach statement conveys the same meaning: first, that Koppel engaged in the severe, consistent, and widespread sexual harassment or sexual misconduct; … and second, that he was asked to stop, or given opportunities to change, the behavior but failed to do so.
It is well established that "[w]hen a statement is substantially true, a minor inaccuracy will not support a defamation claim." Here, the court finds based on the record that a jury could find that the first statement, which characterized Koppel's sexual harassment or sexual misconduct related interactions as "sever[e], consisten[t], and widespread," was false when made.
