## Facts

- Robert E. Muzikowski, a Chicago community activist, helped found and coach inner-city youth baseball leagues.
- A nonfiction book about a Chicago inner-city Little League included some discussion of Muzikowski’s role as a coach.
- Paramount and related entities produced and distributed a film based on the book that featured a white coach character of an inner-city team.
- Muzikowski alleged the film’s coach character was identifiable as him but was portrayed with false, discrediting traits (including criminal and immoral conduct) that he did not possess.
- Promotional materials associated the film with real events and people, while the film also included a disclaimer stating it was fictitious and did not portray real persons or organizations.
- Muzikowski and a related Little League corporation sued in federal court in Illinois asserting Illinois-law claims for defamation per se, defamation per quod, and false light.

## Issues

1. Whether Illinois’s heightened pleading requirements for defamation per se apply in federal court, or whether the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern pleading sufficiency.
2. Whether the complaint, applying federal pleading standards and Illinois substantive law, stated claims for defamation per se, defamation per quod, and false light.
3. Whether the corporate Little League plaintiff could proceed when represented only by a non-lawyer pro se litigant.

## Decision

- Reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded.
- Held Illinois heightened pleading standards for defamation do not apply in federal court; Rules 8 and 12(b)(6) govern.
- Reinstated the defamation per se and false light claims because the complaint plausibly alleged identifiability and a defamatory or highly offensive false portrayal.
- Affirmed dismissal of defamation per quod for failure to plead special damages.
- Dismissed the corporate Little League plaintiff because a corporation may appear in federal court only through licensed counsel.

## Legal Principles

- In federal court, state-law heightened pleading requirements for defamation claims are displaced by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governing pleadings and motions to dismiss.
- Under Illinois law, defamation per se covers statements that fall within recognized categories (including imputations of serious criminal conduct) and permits presumed damages; at the pleading stage, plausibly alleging that a fictional portrayal is “of and concerning” the plaintiff may be sufficient to proceed.
- Defamation per quod under Illinois law requires pleading special damages; failure to allege such damages warrants dismissal.
- Illinois false light requires a false portrayal placing the plaintiff before the public in a highly offensive manner; plausibly alleging identification and offensiveness can satisfy Rule 12(b)(6).
- The “of and concerning” question, the effect of disclaimers, and whether a portrayal is reasonably understood as referring to the plaintiff are generally fact-bound matters not ordinarily resolved on a motion to dismiss.
- A corporation cannot litigate in federal court without counsel; it may not proceed through a non-lawyer appearing pro se.

## Conclusion

The Seventh Circuit held that federal pleading rules, not Illinois heightened defamation pleading standards, govern in federal court, allowing Muzikowski’s defamation per se and false light claims to proceed past dismissal while affirming dismissal of defamation per quod for lack of special damages and removing the corporate plaintiff for lack of counsel.


Muzikowski v. Paramount Pictures Corp., 322 F.3d 918 (7th Cir. 2003)