North Dakota Defamation Laws: Libel & Slander (2026)

In North Dakota, defamation is a civil claim divided into libel (written) and slander (spoken), and you generally have two years to sue from the date the statement is published, under N.D.C.C. section 28-01-18. North Dakota has no general anti-SLAPP statute, but it does have a Uniform Correction or Clarification of Defamation Act.

This guide is part of our Defamation Laws by State series. For the underlying concept, see what defamation of character means.

What counts as defamation in North Dakota?

Defamation in North Dakota is a false and unprivileged publication, communicated to at least one third party, that is of and concerning the plaintiff and harms reputation. N.D.C.C. section 14-02-02 classifies defamation as either libel or slander, and sections 14-02-03 and 14-02-04 define each. A plaintiff must show the statement was false, unprivileged, published to someone other than the plaintiff, and made with the required fault, along with damages or a statement that qualifies as defamation per se. Falsity is essential, so truth is a complete defense, and pure opinion that cannot be proven true or false is not actionable. Private plaintiffs generally must prove at least negligence as to falsity, while public officials and public figures must prove actual malice under federal constitutional law. The statement must reasonably be understood as referring to the plaintiff, and North Dakota courts read the words in context.

Watch out: North Dakota's Uniform Correction or Clarification of Defamation Act requires a plaintiff to request a correction before maintaining a defamation action, so skipping that step can undermine a claim.

Libel vs slander in North Dakota

North Dakota separates defamation into libel and slander, mirroring the structure used in several western states. Under N.D.C.C. section 14-02-03, libel is a false and unprivileged publication by writing, printing, picture, effigy, or other fixed representation to the eye that exposes a person to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy, causes the person to be shunned, or injures the person in their occupation. Under N.D.C.C. section 14-02-04, slander is a false and unprivileged oral publication that fits one of the listed categories or that, by natural consequence, causes actual damage. Because libel is fixed, written content such as newspaper articles, online posts, emails, and reviews falls under libel, while spoken remarks are slander. The classification matters because slander generally requires proof of special damages unless it falls into a per se category, while libel that is defamatory on its face supports presumed damages.

Defamation per se in North Dakota

Defamation per se in North Dakota is a statement so inherently damaging that injury is presumed without proof of actual loss. For slander, N.D.C.C. section 14-02-04 lists categories that include charging a person with a crime, or with having been indicted, convicted, or punished for one; imputing the present existence of an infectious, contagious, or loathsome disease; tending directly to injure the person in their office, profession, trade, or business; and imputing impotence or a want of chastity. A catch-all also covers oral statements that by natural consequence cause actual damage. For libel, a statement that is defamatory on its face supports presumed damages, while a statement that requires extrinsic facts to be understood as defamatory is treated as per quod and requires proof of special damages. When a statement is per se, the plaintiff need not plead or prove special damages to recover general damages for reputational harm.

The statute of limitations to sue for defamation in North Dakota

The statute of limitations for libel and slander in North Dakota is two years, set by N.D.C.C. section 28-01-18, which is longer than the one-year period used in many states. The clock generally starts when the statement is published, not when the plaintiff happens to read it. North Dakota has adopted the Uniform Single Publication Act in N.D.C.C. section 14-02-10, so a single edition of a publication, or a single online posting, counts as one publication that triggers the two-year period once. Republishing the same content does not restart the clock, although republishing to a new audience can create a new cause of action. The single-publication rule precludes the discovery rule when the statement was made to the public, so the two-year period runs from publication even if the plaintiff learns of the statement later. Missing the deadline generally bars the claim regardless of merit.

Watch out: Even with a two-year window, the single-publication rule means the clock runs from the original publication date. Discovering an old online post years later usually does not revive an expired claim.

North Dakota's anti-SLAPP law

North Dakota has no general anti-SLAPP statute, which makes it one of a minority of states without a dedicated tool for quickly dismissing lawsuits aimed at protected speech. In states with anti-SLAPP laws, a defendant can file a special motion to strike, stay discovery, and recover attorney fees if the claim arises from speech on a public issue. North Dakota defendants do not have that mechanism and must rely on traditional defenses, such as truth, opinion, and privilege, and on motions to dismiss under the Rules of Civil Procedure. North Dakota does, however, have the Uniform Correction or Clarification of Defamation Act in N.D.C.C. chapter 32-43, which requires a plaintiff to make a timely request for correction before maintaining a defamation action and which can limit damages when a sufficient correction is published. That correction framework is not an anti-SLAPP statute, but it does affect how defamation claims proceed and what damages are available.

Public figures and actual malice

Whether a plaintiff is a public or private figure changes the fault standard, and this rule comes from federal constitutional law that applies the same way in every state. Under New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), a public official must prove the statement was made with actual malice, meaning knowledge that it was false or reckless disregard for whether it was true. Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974) extended the actual-malice requirement to public figures and held that private plaintiffs need prove only fault (generally negligence) to recover actual damages, but must show actual malice for presumed or punitive damages on matters of public concern. North Dakota courts apply these standards directly, and a plaintiff can be a general-purpose public figure or a limited-purpose public figure who has entered a particular public controversy.

Damages you can recover in North Dakota

North Dakota recognizes special, general (including presumed), and punitive (exemplary) damages in defamation cases, with availability tied to the type of statement and the plaintiff's status. Special damages are out-of-pocket economic losses, such as lost business or income, that the plaintiff must prove with specifics; they are generally required for slander outside the per se categories and for libel that is not defamatory on its face. General damages compensate for reputational harm and emotional injury and are presumed when the statement is defamation per se, so the plaintiff need not itemize loss. Exemplary damages may be available under North Dakota law where the plaintiff proves oppression, fraud, or actual malice by clear and convincing evidence. A timely and sufficient correction under N.D.C.C. chapter 32-43 can limit recoverable damages, and on matters of public concern federal law requires actual malice before presumed or punitive damages are available.

How to sue for defamation in North Dakota

Suing for defamation in North Dakota generally follows a sequence, and the steps below describe the typical process rather than advice for any specific situation. First, under the Uniform Correction or Clarification of Defamation Act (N.D.C.C. chapter 32-43), the plaintiff generally must make a timely written request for a correction or clarification before maintaining the action, which can also affect available damages. Second, preserve evidence: capture the exact wording, the date and place it appeared, screenshots with URLs, and proof the statement reached a third party. Third, evaluate the two-year deadline under N.D.C.C. section 28-01-18 and the single-publication rule under section 14-02-10, both of which run from publication. Fourth, the complaint is filed in the appropriate North Dakota district court, pleading falsity, publication, fault, and the basis for damages, and noting whether the statement is per se. Because the correction requirement and deadlines have real consequences, consulting a lawyer licensed in North Dakota is the prudent course.