Tort – Kennedy Center director’s libel suit is dismissed

Where the interim director of the Kennedy Center asserted a claim for defamation, but the alleged statements lacked defamatory meaning and he failed to plausibly plead resulting damages, his suit was dismissed.

Background

Richard Grenell sued Olivia Troye, asserting claims for defamation and defamation per se. Troye has filed a motion to dismiss.

Defamation

The court previously dismissed this defamation claim. Because plaintiff provides no additional support and concedes that he has not amended his complaint related to this claim, the court rests on its reasoning in its prior memorandum order and opinion, that the allegations lack defamatory meaning, and will again dismiss plaintiff’s defamation count for failure to state a claim.

Nonetheless, because plaintiff raises additional arguments in response to the pending motion, the court will address those here. Plaintiff argues that the cases previously cited by the court differ from the posture of this case because defendant’s statement was more than an alleged association and was “a specific accusation about a specific event” whereas the other cases pertain to abstract name calling.

But plaintiff does not explain how that changes the analysis of whether the statement is capable of defamatory meaning. The defamatory portion of the statement is the reference to Nazis and, as courts recognize, whether a group qualifies as “Nazis” is an inactionable or opinion statement. Despite the second opportunity to brief the issue, plaintiff cites not a single case which reached a contrary result.

Plaintiff even implicitly concedes that non-actionable nature of the statement when he argues that the defamation relates to a “so-called white supremacist gathering.” Accordingly, plaintiff has failed to establish defamatory meaning.

Furthermore, plaintiff fails to allege damages. Plaintiff’s allegations regarding damages are conclusory and speculative and, in fact, plaintiff pleads concrete facts suggesting that he was not damaged. Plaintiff alleges in conclusory fashion that he lost business opportunities, but he fails to identify a single such opportunity.

Moreover, plaintiff speculates that, “if he is affiliated with or believed to have promoted Nazi or white supremacist interests,” then he receives less work. By contrast, plaintiff acknowledges that, since these remarks were posted, he has: (i) received private equity opportunities overseas; (ii) been named the Presidential Envoy for Special Missions; (iii) been named the Interim Director of the Kennedy Center and (iv) joined the Board of Directors at Live Nation.

Defamation per se

Although plaintiff’s amended complaint adds additional facts, plaintiff still fails to allege facts showing that the statements bear any weight or plaintiff’s fitness or ability to perform the duties of his office or employment. Thus, this court finds that plaintiff has failed to allege facts pursuant to defamation per se under the third category of defamation per se. Plaintiff does not allege any facts that assert that these statements

impact his fitness or ability to perform his roles. Indeed, whether Plaintiff invited the former Vice President to attend any event does reflect on his particular duties as an Ambassador.

The court finds that plaintiff’s amended complaint similarly falls short in its attempt to allege facts sufficient to show that defendant’s statement subjects him to the prejudice required under the fourth category. Plaintiff identifies his trade or profession as diplomacy and/or national security. He cites no facts showing that defendant’s statement had bearing on his ability to perform any of his professional responsibilities.

Defendant’s motion to dismiss amended complaint granted.

Grenell v. Troye, Case No. 1:24-cv-646, March 25, 2026. EDVA at Alexandria (Alston). VLW 026-3-146. 12 pp.

Full-Text Opinion

VLW 026-3-077
Virginia Lawyers Weekly