The appellant, a lawyer, appealed a trial judgment that awarded her $10,000 in general damages for defamation but declined to award punitive damages.
The defamation occurred when a conservation officer left a voicemail for the appellant's client suggesting she was incompetent.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge applied the correct test from Hill v. Church of Scientology and made factual findings supporting the conclusion that the officer's conduct was not malicious, oppressive, or high-handed.
