What type of damages are presumed in slander per se cases?

In cases of slander per se, the law recognizes certain statements that are inherently damaging to a person's reputation. These include false statements that accuse someone of serious criminal conduct, that allege a person has a loathsome disease, that tend to harm a person's professional reputation, or that imply unchastity in a woman.

What sets slander per se apart from other forms of defamation is that the plaintiff does not need to prove actual damages to receive compensation. Instead, damages are presumed due to the nature of the statements made. This means that the law allows the assumption that the plaintiff's reputation has been harmed simply because the slanderous statements were made, without requiring additional evidence to support the claim for damages.

Thus, in slander per se cases, presumed damages are awarded to recognize the serious harm caused by the defamatory statements, acknowledging the societal understanding that certain allegations are so damaging that harm can be assumed without specific proof of loss. This legal approach reflects the importance of protecting individuals from reputational harm as a matter of public policy.