## Facts

- Michael A. Musto sued Bell South Telecommunications Corporation and its collection agent, Recovery Specialists, Inc., for credit slander based on an alleged false report of an unpaid business debt.
- The alleged defamatory information was first reported to Equifax in August 1993.
- Musto began experiencing credit denials in 1996, learned generally of a credit problem in October 1996, and learned of the specific Equifax report in January 1997 when a creditor obtained his credit report.
- Musto filed suit in March 1997.
- Defendants asserted the two-year statute of limitations for slander under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(4)(g), arguing the claim accrued in 1993 when the report was first made.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for defendants, applying a single publication accrual rule drawn from Florida defamation precedent.

## Issues

1. Whether the statute of limitations for common-law credit slander accrues upon the initial report to a credit bureau (single publication rule) or upon each later dissemination of the credit report to potential creditors (multiple publication rule).

## Decision

- The appellate court reversed the summary judgment and remanded.
- The court held that the multiple publication rule applies to common-law credit slander involving credit bureau reports.
- Each dissemination of the defamatory credit information to a creditor is a separate publication that triggers its own two-year limitations period.
- Because the alleged republication in January 1997 occurred within two years of the March 1997 filing, the action was not time-barred as to that dissemination.

## Legal Principles

- Under the multiple publication rule, each communication of the same defamatory matter by the same defamer to a new recipient is a separate publication giving rise to a separate cause of action.
- The single publication rule is generally an exception suited to mass publications distributed to a broad audience at one time; it does not fit discrete, individually requested credit-report transmissions.
- In credit slander cases based on credit bureau reporting, a limitations defense must account for each alleged republication to creditors; a timely claim may exist even if the initial entry is older than the limitations period.

## Conclusion

Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal held that common-law credit slander based on credit bureau reporting is governed by the multiple publication rule, so each dissemination of the report to a creditor starts a new limitations period, making Musto’s claim timely as to the January 1997 republication.


Musto v. Bell S. Telecomms. Corp., 748 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)