Background
Benjamin Hastings sued Lindsey Spraker and Jessica Fann, members of his treatment team at a behavioral-health agency, for defamation per se. He alleged that they prepared, approved, and published or caused publication of a February 10, 2023 treatment-discharge summary that falsely accused him of violating a criminal statute or ordinance.
Hastings alleged that the summary later reached his public defender and a competency evaluator, who found him incompetent to proceed in a separate case in spring 2024. Spraker and Fann moved to dismiss, arguing that Colorado’s one-year limitations period for defamation claims expired before Hastings filed suit on January 27, 2025. The district court dismissed the claim and denied Hastings’s later proposed amendments as futile.
The Court’s Holding
The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed. Hastings’s complaint alleged publication on February 10, 2023, and did not plausibly allege facts showing that he did not know, and reasonably should not have known, of the allegedly per se defamatory discharge summary at that time. Because injury from a per se defamatory statement is apparent upon publication, the claim accrued no later than February 2023 and was time barred.
The court also rejected Hastings’s republication theory. It was unpreserved because he first raised it in his reconsideration motion, and the complaint did not allege a later republication by Spraker or Fann, or facts supporting liability for another person’s repetition of the statement. The court remanded for the district court to determine Spraker and Fann’s reasonable appellate attorney fees.
Key Takeaways
- A Colorado defamation claim must be filed within one year after the injury and its cause are known or should be known.
- For alleged defamation per se, the injury is apparent when the defamatory statement is published.
- Each alleged defamatory publication must be pleaded separately, and later republication requires allegations tying it to the defendants.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that a later consequence of an allegedly defamatory statement does not restart the limitations clock. Plaintiffs must plead facts supporting delayed discovery or a distinct, attributable later publication.
It also confirms that defendants who successfully defend a C.R.C.P. 12(b) dismissal on appeal may recover appellate attorney fees under section 13-17-201.