North Dakota
North Dakota Defamation Laws: Libel & Slander (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited June 20, 2026). · Law checked current as of August 9, 2026. · 4 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

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, at N.D.C.C. section 32-43-03, 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.

| Feature | Libel (14-02-03) | Slander (14-02-04) |
|---|---|---|
| Form | Written or fixed (print, online, picture) | Spoken or oral |
| Examples | Articles, posts, reviews, emails | Verbal remarks, conversations |
| Per se damages | Yes, if defamatory on its face | Yes, for the listed categories |
| Special damages | Required if not defamatory on its face | Required outside the per se categories |
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, whose section 32-43-03 requires a plaintiff to make a timely and adequate 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 N.D.C.C. section 32-43-03, part of the Uniform Correction or Clarification of Defamation Act, the plaintiff generally must make a timely and adequate 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.

How to Sue for Defamation of Character in North Dakota
To sue for defamation of character in North Dakota, a plaintiff generally must file within two years of when the cause of action accrued, under N.D.C.C. Sec. 28-01-18, which lists libel and slander among the actions carrying a two-year limitation. Most defamation cases are filed in the North Dakota district court, the state's general trial court; a smaller money dispute can be brought in small claims court, which handles claims up to $15,000. The elements you must prove, and the defenses available to the speaker, follow the same national framework: a false statement of fact about you, published to a third party, made with the required degree of fault, that harms your reputation.
- Statute of limitations: 2 years (N.D.C.C. Sec. 28-01-18)
- Where to file: North Dakota district court (small claims court for disputes up to $15,000)
- Damages: No statutory cap on compensatory defamation damages
- Anti-SLAPP: None. North Dakota has no general anti-SLAPP statute, so a defendant facing a weak speech-based suit cannot use a special early-dismissal motion and must defend through the ordinary litigation process.
Is defamation a crime in North Dakota? Yes. North Dakota keeps a criminal defamation statute (N.D.C.C. Sec. 12.1-15-01) classifying it as a class A misdemeanor, but it is rarely prosecuted; nearly all defamation matters proceed as civil lawsuits.
For the full step-by-step, see How to Sue for Defamation of Character.
Draft Your Letter
Use our free defamation cease and desist letter generator to draft a letter for North Dakota. It pre-selects North Dakota and surfaces its limitation period and anti-SLAPP status as you write.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I sue for defamation in North Dakota?
Yes. North Dakota recognizes civil claims for libel and slander under N.D.C.C. chapter 14-02. You must show a false, unprivileged statement published to a third party that concerns you and harms your reputation, and you generally must request a correction first and file within two years.
How long do I have to sue for defamation in North Dakota?
Two years from the date the statement was published, under N.D.C.C. section 28-01-18. North Dakota's single-publication rule (section 14-02-10) means the clock runs from the original publication, even for content that stays online.
Is North Dakota a one-year state for defamation?
No. North Dakota uses a two-year statute of limitations for libel and slander under N.D.C.C. section 28-01-18, which is longer than the one-year period used in many other states.
What is defamation per se in North Dakota?
It is a statement so damaging that injury is presumed. N.D.C.C. section 14-02-04 lists slander per se categories: imputing a crime, a loathsome disease, want of chastity, or matter that injures a person's office, profession, trade, or business. Libel defamatory on its face is likewise per se.
Does North Dakota have an anti-SLAPP law?
No. North Dakota has no general anti-SLAPP statute. Defendants rely on traditional defenses and motions to dismiss. North Dakota does have a Uniform Correction or Clarification of Defamation Act (chapter 32-43) that affects damages.
Do I have to request a correction before suing in North Dakota?
Generally yes. Under N.D.C.C. section 32-43-03, part of the Uniform Correction or Clarification of Defamation Act, a plaintiff must make a timely and adequate request for correction or clarification before maintaining a defamation action, and a sufficient correction can limit the damages available.
Can I sue over a bad online review in North Dakota?
Possibly, but only if the review states a false fact rather than opinion. You would generally need to request a correction first under N.D.C.C. section 32-43-03, and you must still prove the elements of libel within the two-year deadline.
Is truth a defense to defamation in North Dakota?
Yes. Truth is a complete defense. A statement that is substantially true is not actionable, even if it is unflattering, because falsity is an essential element of the claim.
Updates
Updated the North Dakota correction-request discussion to cite the operative statute, N.D.C.C. section 32-43-03, and to state the statutory standard of a timely and adequate request.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
North Dakota Century Code
§ 14-02-03Civil libel definedIn force
Libel is a false and unprivileged publication by writing, printing, picture, effigy, or other fixed representation to the eye, which exposes any person to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy, or which causes the person to be shunned or avoided, or which has a tendency to injure the person in the person's occupation.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-27 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ndlegis.gov
§ 28-01-18Actions having two-year limitationsIn force
Except as provided in section 28-01-25.2, the following actions must be commenced within two years after the claim for relief has accrued: An action for libel, slander, assault, battery, or false imprisonment. An action upon a statute for a forfeiture or penalty to the state. An action for the recovery of damages resulting from malpractice; provided, however, that the limitation of an action against a physician or licensed hospital will not be extended beyond six years of the act or omission of alleged malpractice by a nondiscovery thereof unless discovery was prevented by the fraudulent conduct of the physician or licensed hospital. This limitation is subject to the provisions of section 28-01-25. An action for injuries done to the person of another, when death ensues from such injuries, and the claim for relief must be deemed to have accrued at the time of the death of the party injured; provided, however, that when death ensues as the result of malpractice, the claim for relief is deemed to have accrued at the time of the discovery of the malpractice.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ndlegis.gov
Cited in 53 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Diocese of Bismarck Trust v. Ramada, Inc. (North Dakota Supreme Court 1996, 553 N.W.2d 760)“…or the two-year statute of limitations for malpractice in N.D.C.C. § 28-01-18(3) governed an action against attorneys…”
- Kuntz v. Muehler (North Dakota Supreme Court 1999, 603 N.W.2d 43)“…fraud and deceit, and their negligence claim was barred by N.D.C.C. § 28-01-18, the professional malpractice statute o…”
- Schanilec v. Grand Forks Clinic, Ltd. (North Dakota Supreme Court 1999, 599 N.W.2d 253)“…ars of discovery of the alleged malpractice, as required by N.D.C.C. § 28-01-18(3). The district court had jurisdiction…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 14-02-10Uniform Single Publication ActIn force
No person may have more than one claim for relief for damages for libel or slander or invasion of privacy or any other tort founded upon any single publication or exhibition or utterance, such as any one edition of a newspaper or book or magazine or any one presentation to an audience or any one broadcast over radio or television or any one exhibition of a motion picture. Recovery in any action must include all damages for any such tort suffered by the plaintiff in all jurisdictions. A judgment in any jurisdiction for or against the plaintiff upon the substantive merits of any action for damages founded upon a single publication or exhibition or utterance as described in this section bars any other action for damages by the same plaintiff against the same defendant founded upon the same publication or exhibition or utterance. This section may be cited as the Uniform Single Publication Act. This section is not retroactive to claims for relief existing on July 1, 1953.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ndlegis.gov
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Arthaud v. Fuglie (North Dakota Supreme Court 2023, 987 N.W.2d 379)“…pon the same publication or exhibition or utterance. N.D.C.C § 14-02-10. The Uniform Single Publication Act pre…”
- Atkinson v. McLaughlin (District Court, D. North Dakota 2006, 462 F. Supp. 2d 1038)“…tort suffered by the plaintiff in all jurisdictions. N.D.C.C. § 14-02-10 (2005). The North Dakota Supreme…”
- Khaury v. Playboy Publications, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1977, 430 F. Supp. 1342)“…Comp. §§ 40-27-30, et seq.), North Dakota (N.D.C.C. 14-02-10); Panama Canal Zone (4 C.Z.C. 4891 — 48…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Explore the law
This article also draws on these acts and chapters (opening at their first section): North Dakota Century Code § 32-43-01 (Definitions)
Related law for further reading — not part of this article’s citations.
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- N.D.C.C. section 28-01-18 (two-year limitation for libel and slander)(ndlegis.gov).gov
- N.D.C.C. sections 14-02-03 and 14-02-04 (libel and slander defined; slander per se categories)(ndlegis.gov).gov
- N.D.C.C. section 14-02-10 (Uniform Single Publication Act)(ndlegis.gov).gov
- N.D.C.C. chapter 32-43 (Uniform Correction or Clarification of Defamation Act)(ndlegis.gov).gov
- New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964)(law.cornell.edu)
- Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974)(law.cornell.edu)