603-622-7575
603-622-7575

Blog

Defamation Defenses in New Hampshire: Absolute and Qualified Immunity for Statements Arising from Divorce, Custody, Criminal Cases, Police Reports, and Public Records.

Posted by Joseph Kelly Levasseur | Mar 30, 2026 | 0 Comments

Defamation Defenses in New Hampshire: Absolute and Qualified Immunity for Statements Arising from Divorce, Custody, Criminal Cases, Police Reports, and Public Records.
 
By Attorney Joseph Kelly Levasseur PLLC – Manchester, New Hampshire
josephkellylevasseur.com
 
If you live in New Hampshire and have been sued for defamation (libel or slander) after speaking out in a divorce, custody battle, criminal proceeding, or after reporting suspected wrongdoing to police or DCYF, you are not alone. Every week clients call my Manchester office panicked because a former spouse, opposing party, or third party has filed a civil defamation suit in a NH Court.
 
The good news: New Hampshire law provides powerful protections—absolute immunity and qualified privilege—that often end these cases before they ever reach a jury.
 
This article explains these defenses in plain, practical language for New Hampshire residents. It covers when statements made during family-law disputes, criminal cases, police reports, or media coverage of public records are fully protected, how to raise them through an early motion to dismiss, and the red flags that can cause even a strong defense to fail. The information is current as of 2026 and draws directly from New Hampshire statutes and Supreme Court precedent.
 
What Is Defamation Under New Hampshire Law?

To win a defamation case, a plaintiff must prove four elements: (1) a false and defamatory statement of fact, (2) that was published to a third person, (3) fault on the part of the speaker (negligence for private figures or actual malice if the plaintiff is a public figure or the matter is of public concern), and (4) damages — actual harm to reputation or special economic loss. McGranahan v. Dahar, 119 N.H. 758 (1979)
 
 
Important exception on DAMAGES: Defamation per se. If the statement accuses the plaintiff of a serious crime, a loathsome disease, conduct incompatible with their business or profession, or serious sexual misconduct, damages are presumed. The plaintiff does not have to prove the fourth element of actual harm. This is why many custody- or criminal-related defamation suits appear “easy” for the plaintiff on paper — but they still die if the statement was made in a privileged context (judicial proceeding, DCYF report, police report, etc.). But even if every element appears satisfied, the claim dies if the statement was privileged. Privileges exist because the public interest in free speech during official proceedings outweighs the occasional harm to reputation.
 
New Hampshire recognizes two main categories: absolute immunity (complete protection, regardless of motive) and qualified privilege (protection that can be lost only if abused). Absolute Immunity in Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Proceedings.  New Hampshire grants absolute privilege to statements made “in the course of judicial proceedings” if they are pertinent to the matter before the court. McGranahan v. Dahar, 119 N.H. at 766. This protection is ironclad—even if the statement is false, malicious, or made with actual knowledge of its falsity. (As long as it refers to or it is related to issues before the court. (Ex. you do not get to call a plaintiff a pedophile in a courtroom when the case is about the sale of a car--that's a no no because it's not related to the case in the courtroom). 
 
When does it apply?
  • Divorce and custody cases in the Family Division: Anything you say in pleadings, motions, affidavits, or testimony at hearings is absolutely protected i.e. Accusations of abuse, neglect, financial misconduct, or parenting failures fall squarely within this shield because they directly relate to the “best interests of the child” standard RSA 461-A:6.
  • Criminal cases: Statements by victims, witnesses, defendants, or counsel during arraignment, probable-cause hearings, or trial are covered. Pre-litigation communications (e.g., a demand letter before filing a criminal complaint) may also qualify if litigation was genuinely contemplated. 
  • DCYF and child-protection proceedings: These are treated as judicial/quasi-judicial, triggering absolute privilege for parties and witnesses.
The policy reason is simple: courts need people to speak freely without fear of retaliatory lawsuits.
Without absolute immunity, custody battles and criminal cases would grind to a halt as parties self-censor.
 
Important limit:
 
The statement must be “pertinent.” A completely unrelated personal attack loses the shield, but courts interpret “pertinent” very broadly. Statutory Absolute Immunity: RSA 169-C:31 and DCYF Reports One of the strongest protections in New Hampshire family-law practice is RSA 169-C:31. It grants absolute immunity (civil and criminal) to anyone who participates in good faith in:
  • Making a report of suspected child abuse or neglect,
  • Providing information or assistance during a DCYF investigation, or
  • Participating in any judicial proceeding that results from such a report.
This statute applies to parents, stepparents, teachers, therapists, neighbors—anyone who reports in good faith. “Good faith” is presumed unless the plaintiff proves the report was knowingly false. The immunity extends to follow-up statements made to DCYF social workers, mandated reporters, and court filings that repeat the original report. In high-conflict custody cases, this statute is a gamechanger. If your ex-spouse sues you for defamation after you reported suspected abuse to DCYF or repeated those concerns in a parenting petition, RSA 169-C:31 usually ends the case on a motion to dismiss.
 
Qualified Privilege: Police Reports and Good-Faith Communications
Outside formal court proceedings, New Hampshire recognizes qualified (conditional) privilege. A statement is protected if made:
  • On a lawful occasion,
  • In good faith,
  • For a justifiable purpose, and
  • With a reasonable belief in its truth.
Classic examples include:
  • Reports to law enforcement about suspected criminal activity.
  • Communications to school officials, therapists, or other mandated reporters when child safety is at issue.
  • Internal workplace reports that serve a legitimate business interest.
Qualified privilege is not absolute. It can be defeated only if the plaintiff proves the speaker acted with actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth) or abused the privilege (e.g., excessive publication to people who had no need to know).
 
Police reports in particular: Statements made to police officers investigating a crime are often qualifiedly privileged. However, if the same information is later repeated to the media or posted on social media outside the official investigation, the privilege may be lost.
 
The Fair-Report Privilege: What the Newspapers Can (and Cannot) Print

New Hampshire also recognizes the fair-report privilege for accurate and complete (or fair abridgment) accounts of official public proceedings or records. Hayes v. Newspapers of New Hampshire, Inc., 141 N.H. 464 (1996). This protects newspaper articles summarizing court filings, police reports, or public hearings. If you are the subject of a newspaper article based on a public court document or police report, you generally cannot sue the media for defamation unless the article was grossly inaccurate or published with actual malice.
 
Key takeaway for clients:
 
Once a police report or court filing becomes public, republication by third parties is often protected. But if you republish the same defamatory content on Facebook or in a private email after the official proceeding ends, you may lose your own privilege.
 
Motion to Dismiss: Ending Defamation Cases Early

The most powerful procedural tool in these cases is a motion to dismiss under New Hampshire Superior Court Civil Rule 12. Because absolute and qualified privileges are often apparent from the face of the complaint, many defamation suits are dismissed at the pleading stage—before damages are ever litigated.Strategy:
  1. File the motion immediately after service (ideally within the 30-day answer deadline).
  2. Attach the complaint and any public court records or police reports that show the statement was made in a privileged context.
  3. Argue that the privilege applies as a matter of law.
  4. Request attorney's fees if the suit was brought in bad faith (RSA 508:4-b in some circumstances).
In custody-related cases, courts routinely grant dismissal when the allegedly defamatory statements were contained in parenting petitions or DCYF reports. The earlier you raise the defense, the less discovery (and expense) you face.
 
What to Watch Out For: Common Pitfalls That Can Sink a Defense
 
Even strong immunity defenses can fail. Be wary of: 
  • Republication outside the privileged context: Telling your attorney in a pleading is protected; posting the same accusation on social media to humiliate your ex is not.
  • Bad faith or malice: Qualified privilege evaporates if you knowingly lied to police or DCYF. Courts will allow limited discovery on this issue.
  • Irrelevant or excessive statements: A vicious personal attack that has nothing to do with the custody issue can be ruled non-pertinent.
  • Criminal defamation overlap: RSA 644:11 makes knowingly false statements that expose someone to public hatred a misdemeanor. While civil immunity may still apply, criminal charges require separate analysis.
  • Public-figure plaintiffs: If the plaintiff is a public official or limited-purpose public figure, they must plead and prove actual malice by clear and convincing evidence—an even higher bar.
Protect Yourself: Practical Advice for New Hampshire Residents

If you are facing a defamation suit tied to a divorce, custody fight, criminal matter, or police report:
  • Do not delete emails, texts, or social-media posts—preserve everything.
  • Contact an experienced New Hampshire defamation and family-law attorney immediately. Deadlines are short (Appearance within days; Answer within 30 days).
  • Consider filing a motion to dismiss before answering on the merits.
  • Avoid any further discussion of the underlying allegations outside of court filings or with your lawyer.
Absolute and qualified immunities exist to encourage honest participation in the justice system. New Hampshire courts vigorously enforce them because the alternative—chilling speech in custody battles and criminal investigations—would harm far more families than the occasional false statement.If you have received a summons or complaint alleging defamation arising from a New Hampshire divorce, custody case, DCYF report, police complaint, or public record, contact my office today for a confidential consultation. Early intervention with the right defense can end the case quickly and protect your rights.
 
Joseph Kelly Levasseur, Esq.
Attorney Joseph Kelly Levasseur PLLC
Manchester, New Hampshire
Phone: (603) 622-7575
 
 
josephkellylevasseur.com Tags:
#NewHampshireDefamation #AbsoluteImmunityNH #QualifiedPrivilegeNH #DefamationPerSeNH #DefamationDefenseDivorce #CustodyDefamationNH #DCYFImmunityRSA169C31 #PoliceReportDefamation #MotionToDismissDefamation #NewHampshireLibelSlander #FamilyCourtDefamation #ManchesterNHLawyer #RockinghamSuperiorCourt #DamagesInDefamationNH

About the Author

Joseph Kelly Levasseur
Joseph Kelly Levasseur

Whether you are facing DWI or sustained a serious injury caused by a negligent party in Manchester, New Hampshire, a knowledgeable and skilled attorney can help you obtain the most favorable outcome in your case. I am attorney Joseph Kelly Levasseur. I have 22 years of legal experience successfully helping my clients avoid serious criminal penalties and maximize their entitled compensation. I work aggressively to protect the rights of my clients and get them the compensation they deserve.

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Menu

Contact Us Today